G.R. No. 10695 - De los Reyes vs. Lukban

Case Summary (G.R. No. 10695)

Factual Background

On January 24, 25, and 26, 2007, two child victims, identified in the records as AAA and BBB, then aged two years and eight years respectively, were allegedly sexually assaulted at the house of accused-appellant YYY, their uncle and first cousin of their father. The prosecution’s evidence was that on the stated dates accused-appellant undressed and placed himself upon each child and inserted his penis into their vaginas on multiple occasions, causing the children pain; AAA allegedly suffered the assault once, while BBB alleged three separate incidents. AAA informed her mother several days later of the assaults.

Charges and Informations

Accused-appellant was charged in five separate Informations filed before the RTC as Criminal Case Nos. 09-1411, 09-1412, 09-1413, 09-1414, and 09-1415 for violations of Article 266-A(1)(d) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by RA 8353, each Information specifying dates in late January 2007 and alleging carnal knowledge of the victims, with accusatory language referencing force and intimidation. When arraigned on August 25, 2009, accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Trial Evidence and Testimonies

The prosecution presented the testimony of both children, who positively identified YYY as their assailant and described penetration and resultant pain. BBB consistently testified to three assaults in which accused-appellant inserted his penis into her vagina and succeeded in having carnal knowledge; AAA testified to a single instance of insertion and pain. The medico-legal examination by Dr. Raoul V. Alcantara established no recent extragenital physical injury and no laceration or rupture of the hymen for either child. The defense consisted of a categorical denial, an alibi that accused-appellant was working as a stay-in store helper in a nearby barangay on the dates alleged, and an assertion that the charges were motivated by a land dispute between families. Accused-appellant’s mother and a neighbor testified for the defense but did not substantiate his claimed minority or conclusively prove the alibi.

Regional Trial Court Decision

In a Decision dated February 13, 2018, the RTC convicted accused-appellant of four counts of Statutory Rape and acquitted him in Criminal Case No. 09-1413. The RTC credited the testimonies of AAA and BBB, observing that youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth, and found their identifications clear, simple, spontaneous, and straightforward. The RTC rejected the accused’s denial and unsubstantiated alibi and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole for each conviction, awarding varying amounts of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages to the victims as set out in its dispositive.

Court of Appeals Ruling

The Court of Appeals, in its October 1, 2019 Decision in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 11075, denied accused-appellant’s appeal, affirmed the RTC’s conviction, and modified the awards for damages. The CA ruled that because AAA was below seven years old, the proper designation of the offense against her was Qualified Statutory Rape, and thus increased the awards to P100,000.00 each as civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages for AAA. For BBB, the CA affirmed liability and set civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages at P75,000.00 each per count.

Issues on Appeal and Arguments of Accused

Accused-appellant sought review in the Supreme Court, reiterating that the RTC erred in convicting him because: (1) he was a minor, allegedly seventeen years old at the time of the offenses, which would affect discernment and penal consequences; (2) the prosecution’s evidence was insufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; and (3) his denial and alibi were credible and unrefuted.

Supreme Court Ruling and Disposition

The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the CA Decision with modification. The Court found YYY guilty beyond reasonable doubt of three counts of Statutory Rape against BBB and one count of Qualified Statutory Rape against AAA. The Court sentenced him to reclusion perpetua for each count of Statutory Rape and to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole for the one count of Qualified Statutory Rape. The Court ordered payment to BBB of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages for each count; and to AAA of P100,000.00 as civil indemnity, P100,000.00 as moral damages, and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages. All monetary awards were directed to earn legal interest at six percent per annum from finality until full payment.

Legal Basis and Reasoning

The Court rejected accused-appellant’s claim of minority as unsupported and self-serving because the defense failed to present documentary proof of his date of birth such as a birth certificate or baptismal certificate, and neither his witnesses nor he established absence of such documents as contemplated by Section 7 of RA 9344 and Rule 35.b of its IRR. The Court reiterated that testimonial proof of minority is admissible only when documentary proof is absent and when conditions demonstrating reliability concur, none of which were satisfied here. Substantively, the Court held the prosecution proved the elements of Statutory Rape under Article 266-A: the victims’ ages were established by admitted birth certificates and were indisputed; carnal knowledge was proven by the victims’ positive, consistent, and credible testimonies. The Court emphasized that a slightest penetration suffices to consummate rape and that the victim’s testimony, when credible, is the principal evidence in rape prosecutions; the medico-legal report was merely corroborative and its failure to show hymenal laceration did not negate the victims’ credible statements. The Court further found the alibi untenable because the alleged place of employment cited by the defense was only six to seven kilometers from the situs of the assaults, making presence at the crime scene plausible, and because pos

Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 10695)

Parties and Posture

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES was the plaintiff-appellee in five criminal Informations charging YYY as accused-appellant with five counts of Statutory Rape.
The cases were docketed as Criminal Case Nos. 09-1411 to 09-1415 before Branch 63, Regional Trial Court, xxxxxxxx , Camarines Sur.
The RTC rendered its decision on February 13, 2018 convicting YYY for four counts and acquitting him in one count.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 11075 by Decision dated October 1, 2019 with modification as to damages.
YYY filed a notice of appeal and the Supreme Court resolved the appeal by decision reported at 909 Phil. 670.

Key Facts

The alleged offenses occurred on January 24, 25, and 26, 2007 at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx , Camarines Sur.
The offended parties were siblings AAA and BBB, who were two years old and eight years old, respectively, at the time of the alleged acts.
The Informations narrated that YYY removed his clothes and the victims' clothing, placed himself on top of each victim, and inserted his penis into their vaginas by force and intimidation.
AAA later informed her mother of the incidents after several days following the alleged events.
YYY pleaded not guilty at arraignment on August 25, 2009 and asserted alibi and denial throughout trial.

Prosecution Evidence

Both AAA and BBB testified identifying YYY as their attacker and describing penile insertion that caused pain.
BBB consistently testified she was raped three times and that penetration, though not necessarily complete, occurred on those occasions.
AAA testified to a single occasion of penile insertion and pain.
Birth certificates for AAA and BBB were admitted to establish their respective dates of birth.
Medico-legal Report Nos. BRO-MG-08-111 and BRO-MG-08-110 by Dr. Raoul V. Alcantara noted no recent extragenital physical injury and no sign of hymenal laceration or rupture for both victims.

Defense Contentions

YYY denied the allegations and claimed he worked as a stay-in store helper on the dates in question.
YYY alleged the criminal charges arose from a land quarrel between his parents and the victims’ parents.
YYY claimed minority at the time of the offenses, asserting he was seventeen years old when the acts occurred.
The defense presented testimony from YYY’s mother and a neighbor but did not produce documentary proof of YYY’s date of birth.

RTC Decision

The RTC found YYY guilty beyond reasonable doubt of four counts of Statutory Rape and acquitted him in Criminal Case No. 09-1413.
The RTC credited the testimonies of AAA and BBB as clear, simple, spontaneous, and straightforward and regarded youth and immaturity as badges of truth.
The RTC sentenced YYY to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole for the convictions and awarded P75,000 as civil indemnity, P75,000 as moral damages, and P30,000 as exemplary damages per count, with legal interest.

Court of Appeals Decision

The CA denied YYY’s appeal and affirmed the RTC’s conviction in its Decision dated October 1, 2019 with modification of damages.
The CA increased the damages awarded to AAA to P100,000 as civil indemnity, P100,000 as moral damages, and P100,000 as exemplary damages because AAA was under seven years of age.
The CA affirmed the finding of guilt for the counts involving BBB and the modification of the monetary awards.

Issue Presented

The sole legal issue was whether the CA erred in affirming YYY’s conviction for Statutory Rape and Qualified Statutory Rape.

Supreme Court Ruling and Disposition

The Supreme Court denied the appeal and affirmed the CA decision with modification as to nomenclature and certain qualifications on sentencing.
The Court found YYY guilty of three counts of Statutory Rape under paragraph (1)(d), Article 266-A, in relation to Article 266-B of th