G.R. No. 186460 - People vs. Cinco y Soyosa

Case Summary (G.R. No. 186460)

Procedural History

Multiple informations were filed and consolidated: an initial information for acts of lasciviousness (Criminal Case No. Q-98-79944) and two later informations charging rape (Criminal Case Nos. Q-99-89097 and Q-99-89098). The accused pleaded not guilty, trial ensued, and the RTC convicted him of two counts of rape and acquitted him on the acts of lasciviousness charge. The RTC sentenced him to reclusion perpetua for each rape count and awarded civil indemnity, moral and exemplary damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision in toto. The Supreme Court reviewed the CA decision and affirmed it with modification deleting the exemplary damages award.

Facts as Alleged by the Prosecution

AAA, then 14 years old, lived in the house of her aunt BBB and the accused. AAA testified to two incidents in November 1998: on 1 November 1998 at around 6:00 p.m. the accused entered, threatened her with a knife, tied her hands behind her head, removed her skirt and panty, forced himself on her, caused pain and bleeding, and then left; and later in November (around 4:00 p.m.) the accused again entered armed with a knife, restrained her with a handkerchief and rope, undressed her, had penile‑vaginal intercourse, warned her not to tell, and left. AAA first reported only “touching” to barangay officials because of threats by the accused’s siblings; she later disclosed the rape to a social worker at DSWD and underwent a medical/genital examination.

Medical and Documentary Evidence

Dr. Mariella Castillo examined AAA at Camp Crame and found an estrogenized hymen with healed lacerations at the 6:00 and 8:00 positions; deep posterior notches indicated previous laceration consistent with penetration injuries or insertion of an object. Documentary exhibits offered by the prosecution included provisional and final medical certificates (Exhibits A and B), AAA’s sworn statement (Exhibit C), and her birth certificate (Exhibit D). These documentary pieces, together with witness testimony, formed the evidentiary basis for the rape convictions.

Defense Case and Alibi

The accused denied the charges and asserted an alibi: he claimed he was selling ice cream in Cubao on 1 November 1998 and during the latter part of November 1998, returning home only the following mornings. Defense witnesses (Gregorio Frias and Roel Cinco) corroborated that the accused was selling ice cream in Cubao on the stated dates or was otherwise engaged outside the house. The accused also asserted a motive to fabricate by AAA, alleging prior thefts of money by her from his money box.

Trial Court Findings and Sentencing

The RTC found the testimony of AAA and the medical evidence credible and sufficient to establish the two rape offenses charged in Criminal Case Nos. Q-99-89097 and Q-99-89098. The RTC convicted the accused of rape in both counts, imposed reclusion perpetua for each conviction, and ordered damages of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages, and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages in each case. The RTC acquitted the accused in Criminal Case No. Q-98-79944 for acts of lasciviousness for failure of proof.

Issue on Appeal Presented by the Accused

The sole error urged on appeal was that the informations in the two rape cases were insufficient for failing to state with particularity the approximate dates of the alleged rapes. The accused contended that the informations’ vagueness as to time deprived him of his constitutional right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation and impaired his ability to prepare his defense.

Legal Standard on Sufficiency of an Information

Under Rule 110 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, an information must generally state the accused’s name, the statutory designation of the offense, the acts or omissions constituting the offense, the offended party, the approximate date of the offense, and the place of its commission. Section 11 of Rule 110 provides that a precise date need not be stated except when it is a material ingredient, and the offense may be alleged to have occurred “on a date as near as possible” to the actual date. Jurisprudence recognizes that in rape cases the exact date or time is not an essential element because the gravamen is carnal knowledge by force and intimidation; therefore, allegations of month and year or “on or about” a specified period will generally suffice so long as the crime is proven to have occurred within the court’s territorial jurisdiction and within the statute of limitations.

Application of the Law to the Information Challenged

The Court applied the foregoing standards and precedent to the informations at issue. Criminal Case No. Q-99-89097 alleged the rape “on or about November 1998,” which the Court deemed sufficient because the date is not a material element of rape and the prosecution proved the occurrence prior to information filing. Criminal Case No. Q-99-89098 specifically alleged 1 November 1998 as the date, consistent with AAA’s testimony affirming that date for one of the rapes. The Court concluded that there was no fatal variance between the informations and the evidence that would invalidate the charges or prejudice the accused’s ability to prepare his defense. Consequently, the informations were valid and the trial proceeded properly.

Penalty Analysis under RA 8353

The Court recognized Republic Act No. 8353 (Anti‑Rape Law of 1997) as the governing statute for the rapes committed in Novembe

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 186460)

Case Caption, Court and Decision

G.R. No. 186460; Third Division; Decision promulgated December 04, 2009.
For review is the Decision dated 30 January 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CA‑G.R. CR‑HC No. 01537, which affirmed in toto the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 106, Quezon City Decision dated 14 July 2005 in Criminal Cases No. Q‑98‑79944, Q‑99‑89097, and Q‑99‑89098.
The Supreme Court opinion was penned by Justice CHICO‑NAZARIO. Justices Corona (Chairperson), Velasco, Jr., Nachura, and Bersamin, JJ., concurred. Associate Justice Lucas P. Bersamin was designated to sit as an additional member replacing Associate Justice Diosdado M. Peralta per raffle dated 20 April 2009.

Parties

Plaintiff‑Appellee: The People of the Philippines.
Accused‑Appellant: Gualberto Cinco y Soyosa.
Private complainant/offended party (victim): identified in the record by initials AAA pursuant to R.A. No. 9262 to protect identity.

Charges and Informations Filed

Criminal Case No. Q‑98‑79944: Information filed November 1998 charging acts of lasciviousness. Allegation: on or about 30 November 1998 in Quezon City, with lewd design, accused willfully, unlawfully and feloniously committed an act of sexual abuse upon AAA, a minor (14 years), by touching and mashing her breast, against her will and without her consent.
Criminal Case No. Q‑99‑89097: Information filed 18 August 1999 charging rape. Allegation: on or about November 1998 in Quezon City, by means of force and intimidation, accused undressed AAA, a minor (14), inside her room at XXX and thereafter had carnal knowledge with AAA against her will and without her consent.
Criminal Case No. Q‑99‑89098: Information filed 18 August 1999 charging rape. Allegation: on or about 1 November 1998 in Quezon City, by means of force and intimidation, accused undressed AAA in the sala of their house at XXX and thereafter had carnal knowledge with AAA against her will and without her consent.
The three cases were subsequently consolidated for trial.

Arraignment, Plea and Trial

Arraignment: 7 February 2000; appellant, assisted by counsel de oficio, pleaded not guilty.
Trial on the merits ensued with testimony from medical and lay witnesses for the prosecution and testimony from accused and defense lay witnesses.

Facts as Established by Prosecution Witnesses (AAA and Dr. Mariella Castillo)

Victim background: AAA born 21 August 1984 in province of YYY; at age 12 she was taken by aunt BBB from paternal grandmother to BBB’s residence at XXX where she lived with BBB and appellant (BBB’s common‑law spouse/live‑in partner).
First incident (alleged 1 November 1998): At around 6:00 p.m., while AAA watched television, appellant entered, went to kitchen, took a knife and poked it at AAA; he told her not to shout or he would kill her; he tied her hands at the back of her head, removed her skirt and panty; she cried, he ordered her to stop; he went on top of her, spread her thighs, inserted his penis into her vagina and made push and pull movements; AAA felt pain in her vagina and tried to push him away but could not; he pinched her breast causing pain; after the act he untied her, put on his shorts, and left; AAA saw her panty stained with blood when she went to the comfort room.
Second incident (latter part of November 1998): At about 4:00 p.m., while appellant was drinking with friends outside, appellant entered AAA’s room armed with a knife, pointed it at her neck, told her not to make noise, covered her mouth with a handkerchief, tied her hands with nylon rope, removed his pants and brief, stripped her of shorts and panty, went on top of her, inserted his penis into her vagina and made up and down movements; before leaving he warned her not to tell anyone or he would kill her.
Threats and coercion affecting reporting: Upon going to the barangay hall to report, AAA told barangay officials she was merely touched and not raped because appellant’s siblings Sonia and Roel threatened to kill her if she divulged the truth.
Reporting and examination: Appellant was arrested and detained; AAA filed complaint for acts of lasciviousness with Office of the Prosecutor, Quezon City; she thereafter confided to BBB and was accompanied to DSWD Marilac Hills, Alabang; AAA disclosed rape to a social worker; the social worker and BBB took AAA to Camp Crame for physical and genital examination by Dr. Mariella Castillo.
Dr. Castillo’s genital examination findings: AAA had an estrogenized hymen with healed laceration at 6:00 o’clock and 8:00 o’clock positions; the deep notches located in the posterior part of the hymen indicate prior laceration now healed; the notches were caused by penetration injuries or insertion of an object through the hymen opening into the vaginal canal.
AAA’s testimony at trial included categorical statements that she was raped on 1 November 1998 and in the latter part of November 1998.

Documentary Evidence Offered by the Prosecution

Exhibit A: Provisional medical certificate of AAA issued by Dr. Mariella Castillo (Records, p. 144).
Exhibit B: Final medical certificate of AAA issued by Dr. Mariella Castillo (Records, p. 145).
Exhibit C: Sworn statement of AAA (Records, p. 146).
Exhibit D: AAA’s birth certificate (Records, p. 150).

Defense Case, Witnesses and Alibi

Appellant’s testimony: Denied liability; asserted alibi that on 1 November 1998 from 8:00 a.m. to midnight he was selling ice cream in Cubao, Quezon City and went home the following morning (2 November 1998); similarly asserted that in the latter part of November 1998 he sold ice cream the whole day in Cubao and returned home the following morning. Alleged motive for fabrication: AAA previously caught stealing money from his box inside the house.
Defense witnesses: Gregorio Frias (friend of appellant) testified that on 1 November 1998 he and appellant were selling ice cream in Cubao and that on 30 November 1998 they were selling ice cream in Cubao; Roel Cinco (appellant’s brother) testified that on 1 November 1998 he was watching television inside appellant’s house, that appellant arriv