People v. Abapo
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The accused-appellant, Petronilo Abapo, was charged with two counts of rape. In Criminal Case No. 133(90), the offended party, Merlyn Navalon, alleged that in January 1989, in Digos, Davao del Sur, the accused covered her mouth while she was sleeping, threatened to kill her and her family, and had carnal knowledge of her against her will. In Criminal Case No. 136(90), the offended party, Cherry Lyn Navalon (a minor of 11 years), alleged that in late September or early October 1989, in Digos, Davao del Sur, the accused used force or intimidation to have carnal knowledge of her against her will. The accused pleaded not guilty. Procedural History: A joint trial of the two cases was conducted. The Regional Trial Court found the accused Petronilo Abapo guilty of two counts of rape and sentenced him to two life sentences (reclusion perpetua), with specific awards for moral, exemplary, actual, attorney's fees, and litigation expenses damages for each victim. The accused appealed the decision. The Petition: The accused-appellant assigned several errors, including the claim that the rape cases were fabrications, that the complainants' father and relatives conspired to fabricate charges, that his arrest and investigation were illegal and violated his constitutional rights, that evidence was planted and seized without a warrant, that the complainants were not in the alleged locations at the time of the rapes, that the claims of rape were incredible, and that the complainants lost their virginity due to sexual intercourse with their brother. He also denied an amorous relationship with Carmenia Manliclic.
Issue(s)
Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty of two counts of rape. Whether the rape charges were fabrications and the result of a conspiracy. Whether the accused's constitutional rights were violated due to illegal arrest and lack of a search warrant. Whether the evidence presented against the accused was planted and inadmissible. Whether the complainants were in the alleged locations at the time of the rapes. Whether the testimonies of the complainants were credible. Whether the accused's arrest was illegal and constituted a waiver of rights, and whether the alleged extortion attempts by law enforcement and complainants invalidated the proceedings. Whether the modification of damages awarded by the lower court was warranted.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the appealed decision with modifications to the damages awarded. The Court held Petronilo Abapo guilty of two counts of rape, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua in each case. The awards for moral damages were reduced, exemplary damages were deleted, and awards for attorney's fees and expenses of litigation were also reduced.
Ratio Decidendi
On the credibility of witnesses and fabrication of charges: The Court reiterated the well-entrenched rule that appellate courts give great weight to the findings of fact by trial courts, as they are in a better position to observe the demeanor of witnesses. The testimonies of Merlyn and Cherry Lyn Navalon were found to be credible, and any inconsistencies were considered normal for spontaneous, unrehearsed testimony. The Court doubted that two young girls would concoct such a story if it had not happened. The defense's claims of fabrication by the father and relatives due to jealousy or a land dispute were not convincing, as the Court found it unlikely for a father to subject his daughters to the humiliation of a rape trial for such reasons. The Court also noted that the complainants' ability to withstand the rigors of a rape trial and convince the court of their honesty indicated the veracity of their claims, not a fabricated story for land. The trial court's observation that no one would invent rape for a piece of land, especially when half the land was already given to the children by amicable settlement, further supported this conclusion. On the alleged abuse by the brother and loss of virginity: The Court dismissed the defense's attempt to attribute the loss of virginity to the brother, Bernardo Navalon III, as a desperate attempt to distract the Court. The complainants vehemently denied having sexual intercourse with their brother. Even if arguendo this were true, it would be the basis for a separate criminal case and had no bearing on the present suit where the appellant was positively identified as the perpetrator. The Court found it amazing that the appellant and Carmenia Manliclic could convince Bernardo Navalon III to confess to such a crime to exculpate the appellant. The assertion that the appellant and Carmenia Manliclic were not paramours was deemed trivial and not fatal to the prosecution's case. The presence of Merlyn's siblings nearby during the alleged rape did not render the accusation incredible, as the fact of rape and supporting medical findings were clearly established. On illegal arrest, search warrant, and planted evidence: The Court held that the filing of a petition for bail constitutes a waiver of any irregularity attending the arrest. Regarding the claim that evidence was planted and taken without a search warrant, the Court emphasized that the crimes charged were statutory rapes, where the sole requirement for conviction is the fact of carnal knowledge with a victim under twelve years of age. This fact had been adequately proven, rendering other matters of little significance. On the inconsistencies in the defense's theory: The Court pointed out the defense's conflicting theories: first, that the rapes were impossible because the complainants were not in Digos, and second, that the rape of Merlyn was incredible because her siblings were nearby. The Court stated that the defense should have reconciled these conflicting theories or stuck to one. This inconsistency seriously impaired the defense's proffered theory of the facts. On the location of the complainants during the alleged rapes: The Court addressed the contention that the complainants were not in Digos, Davao del Sur at the time of the alleged rapes. For Cherry Lyn, who was allegedly raped in early October 1989, the defense claimed she was studying in Bansalan. However, Cherry Lyn stated she left her mother on October 19, 1989, corroborated by her aunt. The Court found the reliance on Cherry Lyn's report card misplaced, as it was from a transferee school. More importantly, Cherry Lyn could not recall the exact date but stated it was when she was staying with her mother, who was living with the appellant. This was supported by Carmenia's own admission and Joan Narvasa's testimony that Cherry Lyn was taken by her mother in November 1988. Regarding Merlyn, who was allegedly raped in January 1989, the defense claimed she was brought to Monkayo in March 1989, making the crime improbable. However, the Court found Carmenia's testimony that Merlyn had not lived with her to be debunked by her own statement in a support case claiming Merlyn was in her custody. The Court found Merlyn's positive statement that she lived with her mother, corroborated by other witnesses, more credible. The discrepancy in Cherry Lyn's report card was explained as a transfer record, and Joan Narvasa affirmed that both Merlyn and Cherry Lyn dropped out of school in November 1988 to stay with their mother in Digos. The defense's attempt to discredit Narvasa due to a distant relation was rejected. On the allegation of extortion: The Court also found the allegation of extortion to be self-serving and without basis, concluding that the appellant raised too many extraneous issues, which only served to convince the Court further of his guilt. On illegal arrest, waiver of rights, and alleged extortion: The Court addressed the issues of illegal arrest, waiver of rights due to filing for bail, and the alleged extortion attempts. The filing of a petition for bail constitutes a waiver of any irregularity attending the arrest. The Court also found the allegation of extortion to be self-serving and without basis, concluding that the appellant raised too many extraneous issues, which only served to convince the Court further of his guilt. On the modification of damages: The Court modified the awarded damages, reducing moral damages from P100,000.00 to P50,000.00 for each victim, deleting the P100,000.00 exemplary damages, and reducing attorney's fees and expenses of litigation.
Main Doctrine
The Court affirmed the conviction for two counts of rape, holding that the positive identification by the victims, despite inconsistencies expected from spontaneous testimony, outweighed the defense's claims of fabrication and illegal arrest. The Court emphasized that statutory rape only requires proof of carnal knowledge with a victim under twelve years of age, rendering issues of planted evidence or illegal arrest secondary.