This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2015-06-15 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Q: In your examination of the victim, what is your finding with respect to the hymen of said AAA? A: There is healed laceration at 5 to 7 o'clock position. Q: Is this consistent with the victim of rape cases? A: I cannot say it is rape. But the findings suggest that there was a previous penetration. Q: How about the internal examination you conducted, what is your finding with respect to that? A: The internal examination of the patient shows that the vagina admits two fingers. Q: What is the impression when the vagina admits two fingers? A: The patient has previous penetration.[21] The testimony of a rape victim that is consistent with the medical findings constitutes sufficient basis to conclude that carnal knowledge occurred.[22] As a result, the accused can be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim for as long as such testimony is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[23] | |||||
|
2015-01-14 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| The records disclose that nobody corroborated his alibi. The testimonies of his family relate to discrediting AAA's credibility by mere speculations that AAA could have been impregnated by her boyfriend. They never supported appellant's alibi. Alibi must be supported by credible corroboration from disinterested witnesses, otherwise, it is fatal to the accused.[20] Further, for alibi to prosper, it must be demonstrated that it was physically impossible for appellant to be present at the place where the crime was committed at the time of its commission.[21] By his own testimony, appellant clearly failed to show that it was physically impossible for him to have been present at the scene of the crime when the rape was alleged to have occurred. Appellant lived two houses away from AAA's family and he admitted to have free access to AAA's house being their close relatives. | |||||
|
2014-12-10 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Finally, all damages awarded shall earn interest at the rate of 6% per annum from date of finality of this judgment until fully paid.[27] | |||||
|
2014-06-18 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| In this case, the Court of Appeals awarded P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages. This Court, however, deems it proper to increase the same in line with People v. Gambao,[46] which set the minimum indemnity and damages in cases where death is the penalty warranted by the facts but is not imposable under present law, as follows: P100,000.00 as civil indemnity, P100,00.00 as moral damages and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages. Thus, this Court increased the awards of civil indemnity and moral damages from P75,000.00 to P100,000.00. The award of exemplary damages is similarly increased from P25,000.00 to P100,000.00. Also, in conformity with this Court's recent pronouncements, the interest at the rate of 6% per annum shall be imposed on all damages awarded from the date of the finality of this judgment until fully paid.[47] | |||||
|
2014-02-26 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| certificate, albeit corroborative of the commission of rape, are not indispensable to a successful prosecution for rape.[31] Moreover, even though AAA made no mention of any anal penetration, such omission would not change the fact that she was, indeed, raped by the appellant. As succinctly found by both lower courts, AAA categorically, straightforwardly, clearly and positively narrated her harrowing experience in the hands of the appellant. She recounted in detail how the appellant took advantage of her by bringing her to Kabuboy Bridge, where nobody was present; commanding her to lie down and undress herself at a point of a gun; and successfully inserting his penis into her vagina, not only once but thrice. AAA stated that after the first penetration the appellant stopped. After about five minutes, however, the appellant, once again, inserted his penis into her vagina. Thereafter, the appellant stopped. For the third and last time, the appellant again inserted his penis into her vagina. This narration was consistent with the rest of the medical findings showing fresh hymenal lacerations on AAA's vagina, which according to Dr. Tan is a clear evidence of "blunt force or penetrating trauma" - a disclosure of sexual abuse. For his ultimate defense, the appellant puts forward denial and alibi. Notably, these defenses are totally inconsistent with his line of argument that the rape was committed without force or intimidation thereby implying that the sexual intercourse between him and | |||||