Title
Supreme Court
People vs. Ronquillo
Case
G.R. No. 214762
Decision Date
Sep 20, 2017
Accused convicted of statutory rape of an 11-year-old; conviction upheld by Supreme Court based on credible testimony, medical evidence, and weak defense. Damages modified.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 151370)

Relevant Dates

The case originated with the filing of the Information on November 15, 2001, and the accused was arraigned on August 9, 2002. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) rendered its decision on November 23, 2010, which was affirmed by the Court of Appeals (CA) on November 11, 2013. The Supreme Court's decision was issued on September 20, 2017.

Applicable Law

The case is ruled under the provisions of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), specifically Articles 266-A and 266-B, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353, recognizing the severe nature of statutory rape and its particular provisions regarding victims under twelve years of age.

Background of the Case

On October 4, 2001, AAA, an eleven-year-old girl, was attacked by the accused after leaving a friend's house. The Information filed against Ronquillo detailed the circumstances under which he allegedly raped AAA, employing force and intimidation, mandating a careful review of both witnesses and medical evidence presented during the trial.

Prosecution's Version of Events

AAA testified that after an amateur singing contest, she was followed by Ronquillo, who brandished a gun and compelled her into an isolated area where the rape occurred. Witness accounts and medical findings from Dr. Stella Guerrero-Manalo corroborated AAA's assertion of forceful penetration, with Dr. Guerrero-Manalo confirming signs of trauma consistent with recent assault.

Defense Argument

Ronquillo's defense leaned on alibi claims, asserting he was at a barrio fiesta at the time of the incident and that he did not know AAA. His testimony lacked corroboration from any witnesses, and his assertion of innocence was insufficient against the detailed and direct testimony provided by AAA.

Ruling of the RTC

The RTC found Ronquillo guilty beyond reasonable doubt, concluding that the elements of statutory rape were sufficiently proven. The court emphasized the credibility of AAA’s testimony and the supporting medical evidence that aligned with her account of the events, resulting in a sentence of reclusion perpetua along with financial penalties to AAA.

Ruling of the CA

The Court of Appeals upheld the RTC's decision but modified the damage awards. It reduced the civil indemnity and moral damages, while imposing additional exemplary damages. The CA maintained that the defense's argument of denial and alibi lacked substantial support in light of AAA’s solid testimony and the medical findings.

Supreme Court's Findings

The Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts' decisions and highlighted that the elements required for statutory rape—specifically the victim's age and evidence of carnal knowledge—were unequivocally established. The high court reiterated that consent is fundamentally irrelevant in statutory rape cases, reinforcing the necessity of protecting minors from sexual exploitation.

Evidence and Testimony Analysis

AAA's account was deemed credible, supported by consistent medical evidence from Dr. Guerrero-Manalo. The ruling emphasized the reliability of a victim's testimony, especially when corroborated by forensi

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.