Title
People vs. Moreno y Reg
Case
G.R. No. 140033
Decision Date
Jan 25, 2002
A service crew member was robbed and raped by a man she identified; the Supreme Court convicted him of separate crimes of rape and theft, ruling the robbery was an afterthought.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 140033)

Arrest and Identification

Vendors assisted Felix back to the outlet and summoned police. Officers recovered her ring at the scene and, with the victim, searched the vicinity. In Laperal Compound they observed Moreno hiding, wearing Felix’s T-shirt. Upon approach, she positively identified him as her assailant. He was arrested and taken to the Makati Police Station without private counsel.

Medical Examination

On the morning of 9 January 1999, NBI medico-legal officer Dr. Aurea Villena found on Felix contusions to the breasts; intact but distensible hymen with 2.5 cm orifice; and positive human spermatozoa, confirming recent forced intercourse.

Trial Court Proceedings

Moreno pleaded not guilty. Prosecution presented Felix’s testimony, police witnesses, and medico-legal report. Defense offered alibi: he claimed to have been asleep at his uncle’s house in Laperal Compound. A neighbor testified to his presence until about 10 P.M. on 7 January 1999.

RTC Decision

The trial court credited Felix’s detailed positive identification, rejecting alibi and denial. Under RPC Arts. 293-294 it found Moreno guilty of the special complex crime of robbery with rape, applied nocturnity as aggravating circumstance, imposed death penalty, and awarded P200,000 moral damages and P1,000 for unrecovered property.

Issues on Appeal

  1. Whether evidence established robbery with rape beyond reasonable doubt.
  2. Whether Moreno’s right to counsel and to remain silent under the 1987 Constitution were violated upon arrest.
  3. Whether nocturnity was properly appreciated as aggravating circumstance.

Rape Conviction Under Article 266-A RPC

The Supreme Court held that force or intimidation was sufficiently proven by knife-at-neck threats and physical control, and that victim’s submission was involuntary. Under the 1987 Constitution and RPC Art. 266-A, resistance need not be shown where intimidation is present. Felix’s immediate police report, participation in the search, consistent identification, and medical findings precluded fabrication. Conviction for rape affirmed; penalty reclusion perpetua.

Distinction Between Robbery with Rape and Separate Offenses

Special complex robbery with rape requires intent to rob preceding the rape. Here, Moreno’s primary intent was sexual gratification—he refused the ring and bag offers until after intercourse. Theft was an afterthought committed without fresh violence or intimidation. Therefore, the complex crime does not subsist; Moreno is liable separately for rape and for theft under RPC Art. 309.

Aggravating Circumstance of Nocturnity

Nocturnity aggravates only if it was deliberately sought and materially facilitated the crime. Felix testified to adequate street and complex lighting; darkness did not obscure identification. Furthermore, nocturnity was not alleged in the information. Under Rule 110 § 8 (retroactively applied), unalleged aggravating circumstances cannot be appreciated. No nocturnity enhancement.

Alleged Violations of C


...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.