People v. Ocampo
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The complainant, Suzette H. Ocampo, alleged that her father, Eduardo T. Ocampo (appellant), had been raping her for a long time. Specifically, on June 21, 1994, she woke up to find herself naked with her father on top of her, also naked. She did not shout for help to avoid public knowledge of the act. Her mother was at their canteen, and her brothers were in another room. She pleaded with her father to stop, and he eventually did. She reported the incident to her mother later that day, who stated that her younger sister witnessed the act. The complainant and her mother reported the incident to her godmother, who then took her to the NBI for a medical examination and to file a complaint. Two Informations were filed charging the appellant with rape. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court of Pasig City (Branch 166) found the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape in Criminal Case No. 113837-H (the June 21, 1994 incident), sentencing him to death, to indemnify the victim P50,000.00, and to pay costs. He was found innocent of rape in Criminal Case No. 113836-H (the February 1994 incident). The Petition: The accused-appellant assailed the conviction, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that the trial court erred in imposing the death penalty without alleging the victim's age in the Information.
Issue(s)
Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused-appellant beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of rape. Whether the trial court erred in imposing the death penalty because the victim's age was not alleged in the Information.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of the accused-appellant for the crime of rape but modified the penalty. The Court ruled that while the victim's minority and relationship to the offender are special qualifying circumstances for the death penalty in rape cases, these must be alleged in the Information. Since the victim's age was not alleged, the death penalty could not be imposed. The penalty was modified to reclusion perpetua. The Court also affirmed the civil indemnity and awarded moral and exemplary damages.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of guilt beyond reasonable doubt: The Court found the complainant's testimony credible, despite minor lapses expected from a victim of such a traumatic experience. The Court noted that the complainant was only fourteen years old at the time of the incident, and allowances should be made for her fear and potential inconsistencies. The Court reiterated the rule that a victim's testimony of violation, if credible, is sufficient for conviction. Furthermore, the complainant's testimony was corroborated by the NBI medico-legal officer's finding of a healed laceration in her hymen, indicating penetration. The Court dismissed the appellant's defense of jealousy and financial motive, emphasizing that a mother would not expose her daughter to such trauma without genuine reason, and a daughter would not accuse her father of such a heinous crime unless it were true. The Court also disregarded the affidavit of desistance, considering it an afterthought and noting that a pardon for rape should be made prior to the institution of the criminal action. On the issue of the death penalty and the lack of allegation of the victim's age: The Court agreed with the appellant that the trial court erred in imposing the death penalty. Citing Section 11 of R.A. No. 7659 and previous jurisprudence, the Court held that the special qualifying circumstance of the victim's minority, when the offender is a parent, must be both alleged in the Information and proven with certainty for the death penalty to be imposed. Although the complainant's minority and relationship to the appellant were proven, her age was not alleged in the Information. Therefore, this special qualifying circumstance could not be appreciated against the appellant for the purpose of imposing the death penalty. Consequently, the penalty was modified to reclusion perpetua, as provided by Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. The Court also affirmed the award of civil indemnity and granted moral and exemplary damages, noting that conviction for rape carries an award of moral damages, and exemplary damages are warranted when the relationship is proven.
Main Doctrine
While the minority of the victim and her relationship to the offender are special qualifying circumstances for the imposition of the death penalty in rape, these circumstances must be alleged in the Information. Failure to allege the victim's minority renders the imposition of the death penalty improper, even if proven during trial, and warrants modification to reclusion perpetua.