G.R. No. 137123-34 - People vs. Contreras

Case Summary (G.R. No. 137123-34)

Parties and Setting

The People of the Philippines appeared as plaintiff-appellee, while Ian Contreras y Eroy acted as accused-appellant. The records show that the prosecutions involved the complainants: Angelic (or Angelique) Ocrenas y Contreras (allegedly six years old), Jodalyn Cabiten y Alinyabon (eight years old), Stephanie Jane Diaz y Ocrenas (allegedly seven years old), and Paulene Jade Diaz y Ocrenas (age stated to be six, but treated by the trial court as not clearly established).

Factual Background

Prosecution evidence centered on the testimony of Nelene Diaz, a cousin of the accused-appellant. She testified that on May 16, 1996, she brought her children—including Angelic, and later the other minors—to the house of her aunt, Teresa Ocrenas, at the Pena Compound in Mapulang Lupa, Valenzuela City, so that the children could play together. Nelene stated that Angelic’s mother had gone to work, and that Nelene locked the children inside while she worked nearby as a rattan weaver. At around 1:30 p.m., the accused-appellant came to obtain the key to Teresa Ocrenas’ house, explaining that he intended to go home to lunch and take a bath before continuing his tricycle route.

Nelene testified that after some time, she checked on her children. When she approached the house the second time, she observed that the door and windows were closed. She then pushed the door open and entered. She testified that she saw the accused-appellant sitting on the floor with his fly open and his sex organ out, while Angelic sat on his lap with her legs spread apart and without underwear. She also stated that her three children were on the bed watching. Nelene said she sent the other children out. She further testified that Angelic left the room after picking up her underwear, while the accused-appellant lay on the bed clutching a pillow. Nelene claimed that she left without speaking, took her children to her house at the back of Teresa Ocrenas’ house, and questioned them about what the accused-appellant had done. She testified that Angelic answered only that: “Kinakantot po kami ni Kuya Ian.”

Nelene added that about three days later, she again talked to Angelic and her daughters, Stephanie Jane and Paulene Jade. She stated that Stephanie Jane and Paulene Jade admitted that the accused-appellant had molested them several times in the past, but that they had not told their mother out of fear. She also testified that she caused the victims to undergo physical examination at the PNP Crime Laboratory in Camp Crame, Quezon City on June 21, 1996 (Stephanie Jane), June 24, 1996 (Paulene Jade), and June 26, 1996 (Angelic).

Medical Examination Findings

The medico-legal examinations were reported as indicating that each tested child was in a non-virgin state. For Stephanie Jane, the report noted absence of pubic hair and an elastic fleshy-type hymen with a deep healed laceration at 7 o’clock, with a conclusion of non-virgin state physically. For Paulene Jade, the report similarly concluded non-virgin state, noting a short, membrane-type hymen with deep healed laceration at 3 o’clock and strong resistance admitting the tip of the examiner’s smallest finger. For Angelic, the report described an elastic, fleshy-type hymen with shallow healed laceration at 10 o’clock and deep healed laceration at 7 o’clock, and concluded likewise that she was not a virgin. The reports also recorded that vaginal and peri-urethral smears were negative for gram-negative diplococci and spermatozoa.

Additional Prosecution Testimony

Teresita Cabiten, the mother of Jodalyn Cabiten, testified that she learned from Nelene Diaz on June 23, 1996 that her daughter had also been raped by the accused-appellant. According to Teresita, when she questioned Jodalyn, Jodalyn admitted that once, when she was in the house of Kuya Ramon playing with other children, the accused-appellant removed her underwear and inserted his penis into her vagina. Teresita claimed Jodalyn was examined at Camp Crame and was found to be in a virgin state.

Teresita also testified about a related incident involving her son Jonjon, stating that he told her he saw the accused-appellant pull Jodalyn under the bed and, when they looked underneath, they saw the accused-appellant’s naked buttocks on the floor while Jodalyn lay in front of him.

As to the prosecution witnesses who actually testified in court, the records show that after the prosecution presented their evidence, the children were made to understand the significance of an oath before testifying.

Jodalyn testified that the accused-appellant raped her, and she demonstrated how it occurred using two dolls. She stated the incident happened before Christmas of 1995, when she was under a wooden bed with the accused-appellant. She described lying on her right side while the accused-appellant lay behind her, wearing short pants and briefs, while she wore sando, shorts, and panties. She said that the accused-appellant raised her left leg and inserted his penis into her vagina, and she claimed that he used saliva on his penis. She also testified that she feared being scolded because the accused-appellant told her she would be punished if she told anyone.

Stephanie Jane testified that she knew how to read, write, and count. She stated that she was raped by the accused-appellant five times, but she could not remember the exact dates because she did not know how to read the calendar. She testified that the molestation started when she was six years old and that the accused-appellant usually had sexual intercourse with her in Angelic’s house, which was about three meters away from their own house. She also confirmed that her sister Arlene was not touched and testified that when her mother caught the group watching accused-appellant about to molest Angelic, accused-appellant stopped and clutched a pillow.

Paulene Jade testified by means of illustration using two dolls. She stated that when she was molested in the house of a cousin, the accused-appellant was wearing a T-shirt and short pants, while she was in sando, shorts, and panties. She said the accused-appellant told her he would put saliva on his penis for penetration. She testified that the accused-appellant’s penis touched her labia majora but he failed to penetrate, and she also testified that after the accused-appellant was through, he turned to Stephanie Jane.

On cross-examination, Paulene Jade admitted that she was molested in the house of Angelic, that she was told to undress or she would be scolded, and that while she was being abused her two sisters and Angelic were watching television. She further testified that the accused-appellant assumed the position to lie beside her, but that he was not able to rape her due to her mother’s timely arrival.

Accused-Appellant’s Arrest and Escape

The prosecution evidence also included the fact that the accused-appellant was arrested on June 26, 1996, hiding in a house at De Castro Subdivision in Valenzuela. After being taken to the municipal hall, he was identified by his victims who gave sworn affidavits to the police. During the pendency of trial, on April 20, 1997, while the trial was ongoing, the accused-appellant escaped from jail and thereafter remained at large.

Trial Court Ruling

On August 25, 1998, the trial court convicted the accused-appellant in four cases and acquitted him in the remaining ones. The trial court reasoned that it could hold the accused criminally liable only for one act committed against each victim. It explained that the victims could not tell the exact dates when the rapes were committed and they did not narrate how the accused raped them on other occasions. It also held that in the case of each complainant, the prosecution presented proof adequate only for one incident.

As to Jodalyn and Stephanie Jane, the trial court found them to be eight and more than seven years old, respectively, and imposed reclusion perpetua for each count of rape. For Paulene Jade, the trial court found that her age was not clearly established and likewise imposed reclusion perpetua, but it declined to impose the death penalty because the prosecution failed to prove with certainty that she was below seven years old.

As to Angelic Ocrenas, the trial court held that she was more than six and less than seven years old at the time of the commission of the offense and sentenced the accused-appellant to death. The trial court based this finding on a PNP Medico-Legal Report (stating a birthdate of December 26, 1989), which would have made Angelic six years old and almost three months old on March 16, 1996. The trial court thus treated Angelic’s case as a qualified form of rape under Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, since the victim was under seven years old at the time of the offense.

Procedural Posture Before the Supreme Court

The decision was elevated for review because death was imposed in one case. The Court noted that appeals from the other convictions carrying reclusion perpetua would have required compliance with 3(c), Rule 122 if the accused-appellant wished separate review. Nevertheless, the Court acknowledged that it would ordinarily extend review to those cases when trials were consolidated and a single decision was rendered imposing different penalties, applying People v. Alitagtag. However, the Supreme Court also noted the effect of the accused-appellant’s escape and the statutory rule on dismissal of appeals for escape under Rule 124, Sec. 8, citing the pertinent doctrine that escape constitutes abandonment or failure to prosecute.

Issues Raised on Appeal

The accused-appellant assigned multiple errors, but only the first assignment remained relevant in the portions actually reviewed. He contended that the trial court erred in meting out death for the rape of Angelic. The accused-appellant argued that the prosecution failed to establish Angelic’s age properly and failed to establish that he actually committed the sexua

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 137123-34)

These cases reached the Court on automatic review from the Regional Trial Court, Branch 171, Valenzuela City, to the extent the trial court imposed the death penalty.
The Court reviewed the records for the rape conviction imposed with the death penalty, while treating the remaining reclusion perpetua convictions differently due to the procedural effect of the accused-appellant’s escape.

Parties and Procedural Posture

The People of the Philippines stood as plaintiff-appellee, and Ian Contreras y Eroy stood as accused-appellant.
The trial court rendered a single decision convicting him in four criminal cases for rape, while acquitting him in the other cases.
The trial court’s judgment imposed death in Criminal Case No. 5668-V-96, and reclusion perpetua in Criminal Cases Nos. 5673-V-96, 5674-V-96, and 5675-V-96.
The decision was elevated for automatic review under Rule 122, Sec. 10, Rules of Criminal Procedure, because the trial court imposed the death penalty.
The Court noted that, although the appealed record could extend to some reclusion perpetua cases under People v. Alitagtag, the accused-appellant’s escape from jail required dismissal of the appeal from the reclusion perpetua convictions under Rule 124, Sec. 8.
The Court therefore reversed the death penalty conviction, while dismissing the appeal for the reclusion perpetua cases and declaring those judgments final and executory.

Informations and Charged Incidents

The prosecution filed twelve informations for rape against the accused-appellant, but the trial court convicted him only of four counts corresponding to the four victims because the exact dates of the incidents could not be ascertained.
The informations alleged statutory rape in relation to R.A. 7610, with the accused-appellant acting “with lewd design” by having “sexual intercourse” with the named minor complainants.
The first set of informations (including Criminal Case Nos. 5668-V-96 and 5669-V-96) alleged the complainant Angelic Ocrenas y Contreras, age six, and covered the period between May to June 1996.
Other informations alleged abuse of minors identified as Jodalyn Cabiten, Paulene Jade Diaz y Ocrenas, Stephanie Jane Diaz y Ocrenas, and additional counts involving Stephanie Jane.
The prosecution’s charging theory depended materially on the minor complainants’ ages at the time of the alleged acts.

Trial Evidence and Witness Accounts

The prosecution presented six witnesses, including Stephanie Jane, Paulene Jade, Jodalyn Cabiten, Nelene Diaz, Teresita Cabiten, and Juan Gubat.
Nelene Diaz, a cousin of the accused-appellant, testified that on May 16, 1996 she brought her children to the house of Teresa Ocrenas in Valenzuela City so they could play with Angelic because Angelic’s mother was at work.
Nelene locked the children inside the house and went nearby as a rattan weaver.
Nelene testified that around 1:30 p.m. the accused-appellant came to get the key, explained he wanted to go home to have lunch and bathe, and Nelene gave him the key.
Nelene later suspected misconduct, returned to check after about ten minutes, and saw through the window that her children were lying on the bamboo bed while the accused-appellant was sitting on the floor watching television.
When Nelene returned again, she found the door, windows, and curtains closed, and she entered to see the accused-appellant sitting on the floor with his fly open and his sex organ out, while Angelic sat on his lap facing him with her legs spread and without underwear.
Nelene sent her other children out of the house; Angelic picked up her underwear and left, while the accused-appellant lay on the bed clutching a pillow.
Nelene stated she left without speaking and brought the children to her house, and when she asked what the accused-appellant did, she reported that Angelic said: “Kinakantot po kami ni Kuya Ian.”
Nelene testified that three days later Angelic later disclosed that the accused-appellant had molested several times in the past, and that Stephanie Jane and Paulene Jade admitted prior molestation but claimed they feared telling their mother.

Medical Examination Findings

The prosecution submitted PNP Crime Laboratory medical examinations on different dates in June 1996.
The medico-legal findings for Stephanie Jane Diaz indicated she was in a non-virgin state physically, with an elastic, fleshy-type hymen and a deep healed laceration at seven o’clock, and smears negative for spermatozoa.
The medico-legal findings for Paulene Jade Diaz similarly indicated a non-virgin state physically, with a short membrane-type hymen and a deep healed laceration at three o’clock, and smears negative for spermatozoa.
The medico-legal findings for Angelic Ocrenas indicated a non-virgin state physically, with an elastic, fleshy-type hymen and healed lacerations at ten o’clock and seven o’clock, and smears negative for spermatozoa.
The Court treated the medico-legal reports as insufficient, standing alone, to establish the accused-appellant’s guilt for Angelic’s alleged rape in the absence of the complainant’s testimony and proof of the elements.

Other Witness Testimony

Teresita Cabiten, mother of Jodalyn Cabiten, testified that she learned from Nelene that her daughter was raped by the accused-appellant.
Teresita reported that when she questioned her daughter, Jodalyn admitted that once, while she was at the house of a person identified as Kuya Ramon, the accused-appellant removed her underwear and inserted his penis into her vagina.
Teresita testified that Jodalyn had a companion account from her brother Jonjon, who reportedly saw the accused-appellant pull Jodalyn under a bed and that they later saw the accused-appellant’s naked buttocks while he was on the floor with Jodalyn lying in front of him.
Teresita further testified that Jodalyn was brought to Camp Crame for examination and was found in a virgin state.

Accused-Appellant’s Arrest and Escape

The accused-appellant was arrested on June 26, 1996, hiding in a house at De Castro Subdivision in Valenzuela.
He was identified by the victims who purportedly gave sworn affidavits to the police, and the case proceeded with inquest.
While the trial was ongoing on April 20, 1997, accused-appellant escaped from jail and remained at large thereafter.
The Court applied Rule 124, Sec. 8 to the effect of the escape on the appellate review of the reclusion perpetua convictions.

Statutory Framework

The Court applied Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, defining rape and its penalty structure.
The Court reiterated that the crime of rape required proof of (one) carnal knowledge of a woman and (two) accomplishment under one of the enumerated circumstances.
The Court also reiterated that the death penalty applied to rape when committed with attendant circumstances, including that the victim was “a religious or a child below seven (7) years old.”
For conviction of the qualified form, the Court emphasized that the victim’s minority must be proved with equal certainty and clearness as the crime itself.
The Court further discussed attempted rape using the elements under general principles as stated in the de