Lawyerly

GR No. 193660

2011-11-16

MENDOZA, J.

The Court finds that the prosecution successfully proved beyond reasonable doubt the charges of rape and acts of lasciviousness against Subesa. All his four children positively identified him as their molester. In rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim, provided it is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[12] Its examination of the records shows no indication that the Court should view the testimony of the private complainants in a suspicious light.

GR No. 184922

2011-02-23

PEOPLE v. PORFERIO MASAGCA

BRION, J.

We find that the prosecution successfully established the elements of rape. AAA positively identified the appellant as her rapist. In rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim, provided it is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[14] Our examination of the records shows no indication that we should view AAA's testimony in a suspicious light. The doctrine in People v. Efren Maglente y Cervantes[15] finds particular application in this case: When the offended party is a young and immature girl testifying against a parent, courts are inclined to lend credence to her version of what transpired. Youth and immaturity are given full weight and credit. Incestuous rape is not an ordinary crime that can be easily invented because of its heavy psychological toll. It is unlikely that a young woman of tender years would be willing to concoct a story which would subject her to a lifetime of gossip and scandal among neighbors and friends and even condemn her father to death.

GR No. 185206

2010-08-25

PEOPLE v. MANUEL AGUILAR

PEREZ, J.

Three principles guide the courts in resolving rape cases: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape in which only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[14]

GR No. 175837

2010-08-08

PEOPLE v. LEONITO AMATORIO

PERALTA, J.

Three principles guide the courts in resolving rape cases: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[21]

GR No. 187494

2009-12-23

PEOPLE v. ELMER BARBEROS

VELASCO JR., J.

By the distinctive nature of rape cases, conviction usually rests solely on the basis of the victim's testimony, provided it is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[15] Accordingly, the Court has unfailingly adhered to the following guiding principles in the review of similar cases, to wit: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; while the accusation is difficult to prove, it is even more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) considering that, in the nature of things, only two persons are usually involved in the crime of rape, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense. [16]

GR No. 186234

2009-12-21

PEOPLE v. FELIX PALGAN

NACHURA, J.

Three principles guide the courts in resolving rape cases: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape in which only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[8]

GR No. 188106

2009-11-25

PEOPLE v. ANTONIO DALISAY Y DESTRESA

NACHURA, J.

Three principles guide the courts in resolving rape cases: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape in which only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[16]

GR No. 187531

2009-10-16

PEOPLE v. ELMER PERALTA Y HIDALGO

NACHURA, J.

Three principles guide the courts in resolving rape cases: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[12]

GR No. 182057

2009-02-06

PEOPLE v. RESTITUTO C. VALENZUELA

BRION, J.

In rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim, provided the testimony is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[25] Our examination of the records shows no indication that we should view AAA's testimony in a suspicious light. Her account of her harrowing experience was candid and straightforward. She remained resolute and unswerving even on cross-examination.[26] To our mind, her testimony deserves full faith and credit.

GR No. 177151

2008-08-22

PEOPLE v. ARIEL JACOB Y ZUÑEGA

BRION, J.

Central in the determination of guilt for the crime of rape is the credibility of the complainant's testimony. Rape is a crime largely committed in private where no witness other than the victim is available.[34] For this reason, jurisprudence has recognized that the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim, provided the testimony is credible, natural, convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[35]

	GR No. 193660 2011-11-16	PEOPLE v. AVELINO SUBESA Y MOSCARDON MENDOZA, J.
The Court finds that the prosecution successfully proved beyond reasonable doubt the charges of rape and acts of lasciviousness against Subesa. All his four children positively identified him as their molester. In rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim, provided it is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[12] Its examination of the records shows no indication that the Court should view the testimony of the private complainants in a suspicious light.
	GR No. 184922 2011-02-23	PEOPLE v. PORFERIO MASAGCA BRION, J.
We find that the prosecution successfully established the elements of rape. AAA positively identified the appellant as her rapist. In rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim, provided it is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[14] Our examination of the records shows no indication that we should view AAA's testimony in a suspicious light. The doctrine in People v. Efren Maglente y Cervantes[15] finds particular application in this case: When the offended party is a young and immature girl testifying against a parent, courts are inclined to lend credence to her version of what transpired. Youth and immaturity are given full weight and credit. Incestuous rape is not an ordinary crime that can be easily invented because of its heavy psychological toll. It is unlikely that a young woman of tender years would be willing to concoct a story which would subject her to a lifetime of gossip and scandal among neighbors and friends and even condemn her father to death.
	GR No. 185206 2010-08-25	PEOPLE v. MANUEL AGUILAR PEREZ, J.
Three principles guide the courts in resolving rape cases: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape in which only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[14]
	GR No. 175837 2010-08-08	PEOPLE v. LEONITO AMATORIO PERALTA, J.
Three principles guide the courts in resolving rape cases: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[21]
	GR No. 187494 2009-12-23	PEOPLE v. ELMER BARBEROS VELASCO JR., J.
By the distinctive nature of rape cases, conviction usually rests solely on the basis of the victim's testimony, provided it is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[15] Accordingly, the Court has unfailingly adhered to the following guiding principles in the review of similar cases, to wit: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; while the accusation is difficult to prove, it is even more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) considering that, in the nature of things, only two persons are usually involved in the crime of rape, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense. [16]
	GR No. 186234 2009-12-21	PEOPLE v. FELIX PALGAN NACHURA, J.
Three principles guide the courts in resolving rape cases: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape in which only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[8]
	GR No. 188106 2009-11-25	PEOPLE v. ANTONIO DALISAY Y DESTRESA NACHURA, J.
Three principles guide the courts in resolving rape cases: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape in which only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[16]
	GR No. 187531 2009-10-16	PEOPLE v. ELMER PERALTA Y HIDALGO NACHURA, J.
Three principles guide the courts in resolving rape cases: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[12]
	GR No. 182057 2009-02-06	PEOPLE v. RESTITUTO C. VALENZUELA BRION, J.
In rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim, provided the testimony is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[25] Our examination of the records shows no indication that we should view AAA's testimony in a suspicious light. Her account of her harrowing experience was candid and straightforward. She remained resolute and unswerving even on cross-examination.[26] To our mind, her testimony deserves full faith and credit.
	GR No. 177151 2008-08-22	PEOPLE v. ARIEL JACOB Y ZUÑEGA BRION, J.
Central in the determination of guilt for the crime of rape is the credibility of the complainant's testimony. Rape is a crime largely committed in private where no witness other than the victim is available.[34] For this reason, jurisprudence has recognized that the accused may be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim, provided the testimony is credible, natural, convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[35]

PEOPLE v. ELMER GLIVANO y SILVALLANA