People v. Jose Dedace
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On March 4, 1995, the incident in question occurred, and the alleged victim underwent a medical examination the same day. An Amended Complaint dated March 11, 1995 was treated as an Information and filed in court on June 9, 1995. The accused pleaded not guilty and was tried in the Regional Trial Court of Hilongos, Leyte, Branch 18, in Criminal Case No. H-630. Procedural History: On October 30, 1997, the Regional Trial Court rendered a Decision finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering payment of P50,000.00 as moral damages. The accused appealed to the Supreme Court. The Petition: The case was docketed before the Supreme Court as G.R. No. 132551. On March 22, 2000, the Supreme Court, Third Division, issued the assailed Decision denying the appeal, affirming the conviction, and modifying the award by adding P50,000.00 as indemnity ex delicto in favor of the victim.
Issue(s)
Whether the prosecution presented sufficient evidence to prove the crime charged beyond reasonable doubt. Whether the trial court's award of moral damages in the amount of P50,000 is proper. Whether an award of indemnity ex delicto in the amount of P50,000 should be granted to the victim.
Ruling
The appeal is denied. The conviction of the accused for statutory rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by RA No. 7659, is AFFIRMED. Sentence of reclusion perpetua is maintained. The award of P50,000.00 as moral damages is sustained. The judgment is modified to include an additional award of P50,000.00 as indemnity ex delicto in favor of the victim. Costs are imposed against the accused.
Ratio Decidendi
On Whether the prosecution presented sufficient evidence to prove the crime charged beyond reasonable doubt: The Court applied settled doctrine that complete or full penetration is not necessary to consummate rape; what is essential is that there be penetration of the sexual organ, no matter how slight. Applying People v. Bacani, the Court observed that the slightest penetration suffices and rupture of the hymen is not essential to prove consummated rape. The Court gave great weight to the trial court's evaluation of credibility, noting that the trial court had the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses and that its findings on credibility are accorded great weight on appeal. The victim's testimony that the accused's organ touched hers was held credible and was corroborated by the medico-legal certificate showing abrasions and hymenal lacerations, which the Court found consistent with the victim's account. The Court further rejected the accused's account as improbable and contrary to human experience, finding that the defense failed to present substantial evidence to overcome the prosecution's proof. On Whether the trial court's award of moral damages in the amount of P50,000 is proper: The Court sustained the trial court's award of moral damages, relying on precedent that the trauma of mental, physical and psychological sufferings of the complainant constitutes the basis for moral damages and that such suffering need not be recited in detail at trial. Citing People v. Ignacio and related authorities, the Court found that the award of moral damages was justified by the nature of the crime and the proven conviction. The amount of P50,000 was deemed appropriate in view of established jurisprudence awarding moral damages in similar cases. The Court emphasized that moral damages are recoverable upon conviction without the need for further proof of mental anguish beyond the fact of the offense. The award was therefore sustained as within judicial discretion and supported by precedent. On Whether an award of indemnity ex delicto in the amount of P50,000 should be granted to the victim: The Court ordered payment of indemnity ex delicto in addition to moral damages, following existing jurisprudence that grants civil indemnity to victims upon conviction of a crime without need for separate proof. Citing People v. Albao and People v. Sumalpong, the Court held that indemnity ex delicto may be awarded concomitantly with moral damages and that the P50,000 amount was appropriate. The Court explained that such indemnity is warranted as civil liability arising from the criminal act and may be imposed by the criminal court upon conviction. The modification to include the indemnity was thus supported by prior Supreme Court decisions and consistent with settled practice in similar cases.
Main Doctrine
Complete penetration is not necessary to consummate statutory rape; the slightest penetration of the sexual organ suffices, and a victim's credible testimony corroborated by medico-legal findings may establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.