Title
People vs. XXX
Case
G.R. No. 231386
Decision Date
Jul 13, 2022
Father convicted of raping daughter over four years; Supreme Court upheld conviction, citing credible testimony, moral ascendancy, and medical evidence.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 231386)

Applicable Law

The case is adjudicated under the provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution and relevant laws pertaining to offenses of sexual assault, specifically the Revised Penal Code, which criminalizes rape under certain conditions involving minors.

Summary of Facts

The prosecution presented that XXX, with lewd design and through force and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of his daughter, AAA. The first incident occurred in June 1995 when AAA was 13 years old, followed by subsequent assaults occurring in October 1999 when AAA was 17 years old. AAA testified—against threats and physical harm from XXX—about the assaults, which included violence where XXX punched and slapped her, and emotional manipulation involving threats to kill her mother if she were to resist. The victim disclosed the incidents only in December 1999 upon discovering she was pregnant, leading to a police report and medical examination confirming her pregnancy status.

Defense

In contrast, the accused-appellant’s defense rested on denial, asserting that the allegations were fabricated due to a misunderstanding surrounding AAA’s 18th birthday party. XXX claimed he could not provide for her desired celebration due to financial constraints. He denied all acts of sexual assault, attributing AAA's accusations to her disappointment over the birthday party.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court (RTC)

After a comprehensive evaluation of evidence, the RTC ruled on February 23, 2015, convicting XXX of two counts of Qualified Rape and one count of Simple Rape. The court underscored the clarity and consistency of AAA's testimony, which did not present contradictions significant enough to undermine her credibility. The RTC sentenced the accused to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole, mandated financial reparation to AAA, and concluded that the nature of the incidents warranted such serious penalties despite occurring in a shared living environment.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals (CA)

The CA, affirming the RTC's decision on November 28, 2016, underscored that the prosecution had met its burden of proof, establishing the elements of the crimes charged. It recognized the unique authority and capability of trial courts in assessing witness credibility. The CA increased the civil indemnities, moral damages, and exemplary damages for each count of rape, aligning with prevailing jurisprudence.

Appeal and Court’s Ruling

The appeal filed by XXX was deemed unmeritorious by the Supreme Court, which affirmed the earlier convictions of the RTC and CA. The Court emphasized the elements of rape met in this instance, where XXX employed force and intimidation in his acts. It reiterated that AAA's testimony was credible, especially in incest cases where the dynamics of family and societal expectations complicate matters of truth. The ruling highlighted that a mere denial cannot outweigh the compelling testimony pr

...continue reading

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