This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2009-06-10 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| On March 22, 2007, respondent filed with the RTC of Carigara, Leyte, a Motion for Reconsideration[17] of the Report and Recommendation of Judge Garrido; and on June 1, 2007, an Omnibus Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration/Motion to Re-Open the Case and to Inhibit the Investigating Judge.[18] He claimed that the penalty of dismissal from service was too harsh, considering the circumstances of the case, and submitted the following to support his motion: (1) affidavit[19] of Roberto dela Peña recanting his earlier affidavit and testimony that his signature in the Certificate of Sale was falsified; (2) Daily Time Records[20] of the court employees of the RTC, Branch 11, Calubian, Leyte, showing perfect attendance and no late days for the month of November 2001, except for Utility Worker Elpidio Gudmalin, who filed a leave of absence from November 13 to 15, 2001; (3) photocopy of the Order[21] dated November 8, 2001 of the Investigating Judge during the hearing in Sp. Proc. No. 714, to prove that the Investigating Judge himself conducted a hearing on November 8, 2001; and (4) PNP Leyte Crime Laboratory Report dated June 7, 2007, stating that the signature of Roberto dela Peña appearing on the duplicate copy of the Sheriff's Certificate of Sale and his signature duly submitted belonged to one and the same person. | |||||
|
2003-08-06 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| While it may be true that it was dark at that time, however, Vanessa could very well identify the appellant as the culprit. It is important to note that they and the rest of the family have been living together in just one roof. Thus, she is so familiar with him. A person may be identified not only by his face or voice but also by his physique, as in this case. We have held that once a person has gained familiarity with another, identification is quite an easy task.[25] Indeed, she could not have made a mistake in identifying her own father as her coital tormentor. This fact cannot simply be overturned by appellant's mere denial which was not supported by any evidence. We have consistently held that denial is an inherently weak defense and, unless supported by clear and convincing evidence, the same cannot prevail over the positive declarations of the victim who, in a simple and straightforward manner, convincingly identified the appellant as the defiler of her chastity.[26] Between the positive declarations of a prosecution witness and the negative statements of the accused, the former deserve more credence.[27] | |||||
|
2002-09-27 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| "fn">[15] Thus, in order that the circumstances of minority and relationship may be appreciated, both must be specifically alleged in the information and duly proven during trial, with equal certainty as the crime itself.[16] Indeed, in the present case, the Information did not allege the qualifying circumstances that the victim was below eighteen (18) years old when the offense was committed, and that the offender was her father. Hence, in no way can appellant be convicted of qualified rape, | |||||
|
2002-07-03 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| We also modify the award of damages. Consistent with current jurisprudence,[28] appellant should be made to pay P50,000 as civil indemnity for the rape committed. Although the RTC correctly granted moral and exemplary damages to the victim, the amounts do not conform to existing jurisprudence. Moral damages are awarded to rape victims without need of specific proof because the mental, physical and psychological trauma suffered by them is already presumed from the fact of rape.[29] Likewise, the aggravating circumstance of relationship justifies the grant of exemplary damages, consistent with case law.[30] | |||||
|
2002-02-06 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| The accused also points out that considering the size of Mary Ann's house, the proximity of Mary Ann's room to the sala where her mother was sleeping, and that the walls between the rooms were made of sawali, it was improbable that Mary Ann's mother who was sleeping at the sala just outside Mary Ann's room was not awakened by the scuffle inside Mary Ann's room at the time she was allegedly raped.[22] We have ruled, however, that "for rape to be committed, it is not necessary for the place to be ideal or the weather to be fine for rapists bear no respect for locale and time when they carry out their evil deed."[23] "Rape may be committed even when the rapist and the victim are not alone, or while the rapist's wife was asleep or even in a small room where other family members also slept."[24] Worthy of notice is Mary Ann's testimony that her right hand and leg were tied to the bedposts, her left leg was pinned down by the accused's knee, and her mouth was stuffed with an unused panty and held by the accused. Mary Ann's movements were therefore restrained. Added to this, the accused threatened to kill her if she did not keep still. | |||||
|
2002-01-25 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| (Witness is breaking down into tears) Court Witness, at this juncture, broke down into tears. Let her calm down first. Witness He inserted his penis into my vagina. Pros. Vergara Now, will you describe before this Honorable Court how your father insert (sic) his penis into your vagina. First, when he was able to remove his pants what was the next thing that your father did? A That's it. He went on top of me, insert (sic) his penis into my vagina and make (sic) a push and pull movement. Q When your father went on top of you in order to insert his penis into your vagina, what was the position of your legs? A It was spread wide open sir. Q Who spread your legs wide open? A He was the one sir. Q Your father? A Yes sir. Q How did he spread your legs wide open? A By the use of his feet sir. Q How about his hands? A His hands were holding my shoulder. Q And what were your hands doing on (sic) that moment, on (sic) that point? A I was boxing him sir. Q And what did your father do when you were boxing him? A None sir. Q He just continued putting himself on top of you? A Yes sir. Q With that position you were lying on your back and your legs were spread by your father wide open, how did you father insert his penis inside your vagina? A He used his left hand to insert his penis. Q And was he able to insert his penis into your vagina? A Yes sir. Q What did you feel during the first moment that his penis touched your vagina? A Of course I felt pain, sir. Q Why did you feel pain? A Because his penis was erected. Q And how did his body move the first moment he inserted his penis into your vagina? A The movement was push and pull and he kept on pumping. Q Was he able to penetrate his penis into your vagina? A Yes sir. x x x x x x x x x Q Now, you mentioned that the last incident of rape that your father committed to you was on November 6, 1997? A Yes sir. Q Where were you on that day of November 6, 1997? A I was at home sir. Q And so with your father? A Yes sir. x x x x x x x x x Q While you were cleaning your house that morning of November 6, 1997, what happened? A He went to get the same knife that he used before at the back of their cabinet. x x x x x x x x x Q Now, in that morning of November 6, 1997 inside your house at Outlook Drive when your father got again that knife, what did he do? A He again pointed the knife at my neck. Q And when he pointed the knife at your neck again what was your reaction? A I was scared. Q What did you do when you reacted that way when your father pointed the knife at your neck? x x x x x x x x x A I was crying to him and pleading and telling him 'don't do that again because I can no longer concentrate on my studies'. Q Aside from your father pointing the knife on your neck, what other things made you afraid and plead to him? A He again pulled me into his bed. (witness broke down into tears again) x x x x x x x x x Court Let us go back to this November 6, 1997 incident. What happened when he pulled you again to their bed with a knife on hand? A He again ordered me to remove my jogging pants and underwear. x x x x x x x x x Pros. Vergara After he ordered you to remove your jogging pants and your underwear, what did you do? A I was pleading to him not to molest me anymore. Q What was his reaction? x x x x x x x x x A He told me that he will make good his threats that he will kill my mother. x x x x x x x x x Q And what happened to your jogging pants and underwear? A I removed it sir. Q And after you removed your jogging pants and underwear, what else happened? A He laid me down. x x x x x x x x x Q What did you do when he held your shoulder with his hands in order to put you on the bed? A I boxed him sir. Q What part of his body did you box? A On his sides. (witness pointing to the left side of her body below the armpit) x x x x x x x x x Q While you were fighting back your father by means of boxing him several times on his body, what was he doing? A He just got the knife on the headboard and he pointed at my neck. Q Was he able to let you lay down? A Yes sir. x x x x x x x x x Q When your father was able to make you lay down, what did he do next? A Again he inserted his penis into my vagina. Q How did he do that? A By using his left hand. x x x x x x x x x Q When he was able to pull you on the bed with your pants and panty already removed, what did he do if any regarding his pants? A He inserted his penis into my vagina and he made a push and pull movement. x x x x x x x x x Q And while he was doing that, was he able to penetrate his penis into your vagina? A Yes sir."[7] Notwithstanding her intense cross-examination, complainant's credibility was not significantly dented. Her testimony is consistent in all material points. It deserves full faith and credit. In addition, courts usually give greater weight to the testimony of a victim of sexual assault, particularly in cases of incestuous rape, because no woman would be willing to undergo a public trial and put up with the shame, humiliation and dishonor of exposing her own degradation were it not to condemn an injustice and to have the offender apprehended and punished.[8] | |||||