Title
People vs. Geneveza y Evangelista
Case
G.R. No. 74047
Decision Date
Jan 13, 1989
Nenita Obogne accused Graciano Geneveza of rape in 1982, alleging forced intercourse. The Supreme Court acquitted Geneveza, citing inconsistencies in her testimony, delayed reporting, and insufficient proof of lack of consent.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 151993)

Facts of the Case

On March 18, 1982, Nenita Obogne reported that she was forced by Graciano Geneveza, who threatened her with a knife, to a secluded house, where she was raped twice. The incident was reported to the police four months later, on August 5, 1982, following confirmation of her pregnancy at San Lazaro Hospital.

Testimonies of the Parties

Nenita Obogne claimed that Geneveza undressed her and forcibly had sexual intercourse with her, citing fear as the reason for her lack of resistance. In contrast, Graciano Geneveza asserted that the encounter was consensual, stating that they had a romantic relationship and that Nenita willingly accompanied him to the house of Melanio Antipuesto.

Defense and Supporting Witnesses

The defense presented Buenaventura Santos, Jr., who corroborated Geneveza’s account, describing the events leading up to the meeting with Nenita as friendly and consensual. Santos indicated that Geneveza and Nenita appeared to be in a romantic mood, lending weight to the defense argument of consensual interaction.

Trial Court Decision

On December 13, 1985, the trial court convicted Geneveza based on the strength of Obogne's testimony, which the court deemed credible. He was sentenced to reclusion perpetua.

Appeal and Arguments Raised

Geneveza appealed the conviction, raising multiple errors by the trial court. He contested the credibility of Obogne's testimony, the dismissal of his defense, the corroborative nature of Santos' testimony, and the significant delay in reporting the alleged crime, which he claimed affected the reliability of the complainant’s account.

Credibility of the Complainant

In assessing the appeal, the Supreme Court emphasized the significant importance of the complainant's credibility in rape cases. It noted contradictions in Obogne’s testimony regarding her familiarity with Geneveza and inconsistencies concerning her state of mind during the alleged assault.

Supreme Court's Analysis

The Court observed that the prosecution’s burden is to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime of rape occurred. It defined rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and scrutinized whether the requisite element of force or intimidation was adequately de

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.