People v. Abon
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: In May 1995, in Binalonan, Pangasinan, the accused-appellant, Nelson Abon, entered the room of his 13-year-old daughter, AAA, and his son, BBB, while they were sleeping. He moved BBB away, embraced AAA, removed their pajamas, and proceeded to have sexual intercourse with AAA. AAA called for her grandmother but was not heard. The accused-appellant threatened AAA to silence her. The act lasted for about 20 to 30 minutes. The following morning, AAA reported the incident to her grandmother, who dismissed it. AAA then confided in Cristeta Bayno, who assisted her in reporting the matter to the police. A physical examination of AAA revealed a ruptured hymen and old lacerations approximately three months prior to the examination. Procedural History: An Information for qualified rape was filed against Nelson Abon. He pleaded not guilty, interposing denial and alibi. The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 48, Urdaneta City, Pangasinan, convicted the accused-appellant of qualified rape and sentenced him to death. Due to the penalty imposed, the case was automatically reviewed by the Supreme Court. However, in accordance with People v. Mateo, the case was transferred to the Court of Appeals (CA) for intermediate review. The CA affirmed the RTC's decision but modified the award of damages. The CA upheld the credibility of AAA and dismissed the accused-appellant's defenses. The CA increased the civil indemnity to PhP 75,000 and moral damages to PhP 75,000, while decreasing exemplary damages to PhP 25,000. The Petition: The accused-appellant filed a Supplemental Brief before the Supreme Court, raising issues regarding the CA's affirmation of his conviction for qualified rape and the increase in damages.
Issue(s)
Whether or not the Honorable Court of Appeals erred in affirming the decision of the court a quo finding the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of qualified rape. Whether or not the Honorable Court of Appeals erred in increasing the amount of damages awarded by the court a quo.
Ruling
The appeal has no merit. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals finding the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of qualified rape. The penalty of death imposed by the RTC and affirmed by the CA was modified to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole, pursuant to Republic Act No. 9346. The increased amount of damages awarded by the CA was also found to be proper.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of conviction for qualified rape: The Court affirmed the findings of the RTC and CA regarding the guilt of the accused-appellant. The Court reiterated the settled rule that substantiated factual findings of the appellate court, affirming those of the trial court, are conclusive on the parties and may not be reviewed on appeal. The conviction was anchored on the testimony of the minor victim, AAA, whose credibility was upheld. The Court emphasized that rape victims, especially those of tender age, would not fabricate a story of sexual violation or undergo the ordeal of examination and trial if not motivated by the desire for justice. Furthermore, a rape victim's testimony against her father is given great weight due to the inherent trauma and social stigma involved, which runs counter to Filipino culture. The accused-appellant's defense of alibi was disregarded as it was not supported by credible corroboration from disinterested witnesses and was established mainly by close relatives. The Court found no reason to overturn the lower courts' findings on the trustworthiness of AAA's testimony. On the issue of damages: The Court found that the increased amount of damages awarded by the CA was proper and consistent with recent jurisprudence on the matter. The CA awarded PhP 75,000 as civil indemnity, PhP 75,000 as moral damages, and PhP 25,000 as exemplary damages. These awards were deemed appropriate given the gravity of the offense and the suffering of the victim.
Main Doctrine
The credibility of a young incestuous rape victim cannot be diminished by an unsupported allegation of mental disturbance, especially when the accusation is against a family member, as victims are motivated by the desire for justice and face significant trauma and stigma. Alibi, to be credible, must be supported by disinterested witnesses and cannot prevail over the positive identification by the victim. The penalty of death is reduced to reclusion perpetua without parole eligibility pursuant to RA 9346.