Title
People vs. Jacinto
Case
G.R. No. 182239
Decision Date
Mar 16, 2011
A 17-year-old convicted of raping a 5-year-old; alibi rejected, minor’s testimony and medical evidence upheld; reclusion perpetua affirmed.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 114427)

Factual Background

On January 28, 2003, at approximately 7:00 PM, Hermie Jacinto allegedly led five-year-old AAA from a neighborhood store to a rice field near the Perochos’ residence. There, he removed her clothing, battered her chest, and inserted his penis into her vagina, causing pain and bleeding. Witnesses FFF (victim’s father) and Julito Apiki observed injuries and remnants of mud and bodily fluids. Medical certificates from the municipal health center and provincial hospital documented multiple abrasions, hymenal lacerations, and soft-tissue injuries consistent with sexual penetration.

Trial Court Proceedings

An Information for rape with qualifying circumstance of minority was filed March 20, 2003. Appellant pleaded not guilty and admitted certain documents at pre-trial (birth certificate of victim, police blotter, medical certificate). Prosecution presented AAA’s detailed testimony, FFF’s observations, Julito’s store‐and-TV-house accounts, and medico-legal findings. Defense invoked alibi: Jacinto claimed presence at an aunt’s birthday party at the Perochos’ home from 6:00 to 7:00 PM, supported by testimony from his aunt Gloria, Luzvilla Balucan, and Antonia Perocho. Inconsistencies emerged regarding the attendance of his uncle, timing of errands, clothing descriptions, and movements of Julito.

Trial Court Decision and Modification

On March 26, 2004, the Regional Trial Court convicted Jacinto of rape and sentenced him to death, with indemnities of ₱75,000 and moral damages of ₱50,000. Defense moved to reopen trial to prove appellant was 17 at the time of offense. The court admitted newly discovered evidence of minority and reduced penalty from death to reclusion perpetua.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The case was referred to the Court of Appeals, which on August 29, 2007, affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to an indeterminate term of 6 years + 1 day to 12 years prision mayor (minimum) and 17 years + 4 months reclusion temporal (maximum). It awarded ₱75,000 civil indemnity, ₱75,000 moral damages, and ₱25,000 exemplary damages.

Issues on Appeal to the Supreme Court

  1. Whether the evidence established guilt beyond reasonable doubt given the alibi and positive identification issues.
  2. Proper penalty under juvenile justice provisions and abolition of the death penalty.
  3. Applicability of suspended sentence and post-sentence dispositions under Republic Act No. 9344.

Supreme Court Analysis – Guilt and Identification

The Court reiterated three principles in rape cases: facility of false accusation, need for extreme caution but acceptance of credible victim testimony, and that prosecution evidence must stand on its own. AAA’s age, familiarity with the accused, clear narration of the acts, and corroborative medico-legal findings conclusively proved penetration and carnal knowledge. Positive identification outweighed the alibi, which failed due to inconsistent testimonies and lack of physical impossibility (short distance from store to crime scene permitted rapid commission and return).

Imposable Penalty and Juvenile Justice Considerations

Because AAA was under seven years old, the rape carried a death penalty under Art. 266-B(6). However:

  • Republic Act No. 9346 prohibits death penalty, substituting reclusion perpetua.
  • Appellant’s minority (17 years old) is a privileged mitigating circumstance under Art. 68 RPC, reducing the penalty one degree but “always in the proper period.” The Supreme Court clarified that for purposes of graduation, death remains the baseline, rendering reclusion perpetua as the imposable penalty.

Civil Damages and Exemplary

    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.