Title
People vs. Loma y Obsequio
Case
G.R. No. 236544
Decision Date
Oct 5, 2020
Efren accused of raping 10-year-old girl; medical evidence supported force claims; alibi weak; hearsay admissible as res gestae; flight implied guilt; convicted of simple rape.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 236544)

Charges and Allegations

On January 9, 2007, an Information was filed against the accused-appellant accusing him of committed statutory rape as defined under Article 266-A, paragraph 1(d) of the Revised Penal Code. It was alleged that on October 21, 2006, at around 6:00 PM, in a banana plantation, the accused-appellant took advantage of the tender age of AAA, a ten-year-old girl, and performed carnal knowledge with her against her will.

Proceedings Before the Trial Court

During the trial, the prosecution presented various witnesses including BBB, the mother of the victim, who testified that AAA recounted to her the alleged sexual abuse. BBB noted physical signs of abuse, including a swollen vagina and a wound on AAA's inner thigh. Medical examination conducted by Dr. James Margallo Belgira supported these claims, revealing lacerations and signs consistent with blunt trauma.

Defense and Counterarguments

In contrast, the accused-appellant presented an alibi, claiming that he was away attending to family matters in Tiaong, Quezon, along with a witness, Faustino Alcovendas, who corroborated his whereabouts on the day of the incident. The accused asserted that he only learned of the accusations against him when arrested in December 2011.

Regional Trial Court Decision

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) determined that the prosecution's evidence did not sufficiently establish the age of the victim, which is a critical element for a statutory rape conviction. As a result, the RTC convicted the Accused-Appellant of simple rape under Article 266-A paragraph 1(a) due to the proof of carnal knowledge through the use of force. He was subsequently sentenced to reclusion perpetua and ordered to pay damages.

Court of Appeals Ruling

Upon appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC's decision but modified the amount of damages awarded to the victim. The CA upheld the Lower Court's finding of guilt and confirmed the evidentiary basis for the conviction despite the absence of direct testimony from AAA, relying heavily on the testimonies of BBB and the medico-legal findings.

Legal Issues Raised

The primary legal issue for appeal centered on whether the CA erred in its conviction of the accused-appellant, with particular focus on the weight of evidence stemming from BBB's testimony. The accused-appellant contended that this testimony was hearsay and thus inadmissible.

Court's Analysis and Ruling

The appellate court determined the accused's arguments lacked merit. It reiterated the critical legal standards for the prosecution in statutory rape cases, which require proof of age, identity of the accused, and the occurrence of the sexual act. In the absence of direct

...continue reading

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