The Supreme Court denied the appeal of accused-appellant XXX and affirmed with modification the conviction handed down by the Court of Appeals, finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of statutory rape and one count of acts of lasciviousness in relation to Section 5(b) of Republic Act No. 7610, all committed against an 11-year-old minor.
The Case
By three separate Informations, XXX was charged with statutory rape, qualified rape, and lascivious conduct. The cases were consolidated before a Regional Trial Court. On arraignment, XXX pleaded not guilty to all three charges.
AAA testified that she had been fetching water for XXX even before the incidents, and that he paid her PHP 10.00 every time she got water for him. On May 5, 2020, she brought two gallons of water to XXX's house. When she was about to leave, he told her to get back inside and to remove her pants. He kissed her on the lips, lay her down on the bed, and told her to remove her panties. She testified that he inserted his penis into her vagina twice and touched her breasts, and that he pointed garden scissors near her stomach. She also testified that he was not able to insert his penis into her vagina, and that his penis only touched her labia.
On May 6, 2020, XXX called her to fetch water, blocked the doorway when she was about to leave, and told her to go back to his bedroom, where he kissed her. She testified that his penis slid into her vagina but he was not able to insert it. On May 7, 2020, while she was gathering chayote tops, XXX told her to buy cigarettes; when she returned, he told her to remove her clothes and kissed her. Her mother saw them, got angry, and left crying. They went to the police station to file a report.
BBB, AAA's mother, testified that on May 7, 2020, she saw AAA on top of XXX, with AAA not wearing clothes from the waist down while XXX was embracing her. Dr. Elizabeth Batino, one of the physicians who examined AAA, issued a Medico-Legal Certificate stating that the anogenital findings were indicative of acute trauma to the perihymenal area and highly suggestive of sexual contact or sexual abuse.
XXX testified that AAA collected water for him thrice a day and denied inserting his penis into her vagina on May 5 and 6, 2020. On cross-examination, he admitted there were times when he asked AAA to enter his house, but denied BBB's claim that she saw him and AAA in bed on May 7, 2020.
The Issue
The question before the Court was whether XXX was guilty of the crimes charged and, correspondingly, what proper penalties and monetary awards should apply.
The Ruling
The Court denied the appeal and affirmed the Court of Appeals with modification. It ruled that in Criminal Case No. 43464-R, XXX is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of statutory rape and is sentenced to reclusion perpetua, and directed to pay AAA PHP 75,000.00 as civil indemnity, PHP 75,000.00 as moral damages, and PHP 75,000.00 as exemplary damages.
In Criminal Case No. 43465-R, XXX is likewise found guilty of statutory rape and sentenced to reclusion perpetua, with the same monetary awards. In Criminal Case No. 43466-R, XXX is found guilty of acts of lasciviousness in relation to Section 5(b) of Republic Act No. 7610, sentenced to 12 years and one day of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to 14 years, eight months, and one day of reclusion temporal, as maximum, ordered to pay a fine of PHP 15,000.00, and directed to pay AAA PHP 50,000.00 each as civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages.
The Court also directed the Regional Trial Court to refer AAA to the Department of Social Welfare and Development for therapy and counselling pursuant to Republic Act No. 8505, or the Rape Victim Assistance and Protection Act of 1998.
By the Numbers
- Incidents dated May 5, 6, and 7, 2020
- Victim AAA: eleven (11) years old
- PHP 10.00: amount paid to AAA for fetching water
- Two counts of statutory rape: reclusion perpetua each
- Acts of lasciviousness: 12 years and one day to 14 years, eight months, and one day of reclusion temporal
- Fine: PHP 15,000.00
- Civil indemnity, moral, and exemplary damages: PHP 75,000.00 each (rape cases); PHP 50,000.00 each (acts of lasciviousness)
- 6% interest per annum from finality of the Decision until fully paid
The Court's Reasoning
Under Article 266-A, paragraph 1(d) of the Revised Penal Code, carnal knowledge of a woman under twelve (12) years of age constitutes rape even without force or intimidation. The Court noted that under Article 266-B, rape is punished by reclusion perpetua, to which XXX was correctly sentenced. In Criminal Case No. 43465-R, being also guilty of statutory rape, he must likewise be sentenced to reclusion perpetua.
For the acts of lasciviousness charge, Section 5(b) of Republic Act No. 7610 provides that when the victim is under twelve years of age, the penalty for lascivious conduct is reclusion temporal in its medium period. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court affirmed the penalty imposed by the Court of Appeals. The Court added a fine of PHP 15,000.00, citing that the gravity of the case and the resultant trauma on the child warranted imposition of the fine under Section 31(f) of Republic Act No. 7610. The monetary awards were affirmed as being in accord with prevailing jurisprudence.
Source: Supreme Court Decision in G.R. No. 275013, penned by Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier.
This report summarizes a public Supreme Court decision and is not legal advice.