3R.

epnblic of tlJe tlbilippine%

$>ttpreme QI:ourt
~nnuio Qtitp

SECOND DIVISION

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 255491

Plaintiff-Appellee,
Present:

PERLAS-BERNABE, S.A.J,
Chairperson,
- versus - HERNANDO,
ZALAMEDA,
ROSARIO, and
MARQUEZ,JJ

xxx, 1
Accused-Appellant.

DECISION

HERNANDO, J.:

This appeal 2 assails the September 27, 2019 Decision 3 of the Court of
Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09868, which modified the Au ust 9,
2017 Omnibus Judgment4 of the Regional Trial Court, 5

The CA found accused-appellant XXX (accused-appellant) guilty beyond

reasonable doubt for Qualified Statutory Rape in violation of Article 266-A,
paragraph l(d), in relation to Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code (RPC).

1
Initials were used to identify the accused-appellant pursuant to Supreme Court Amended Administrative
Circular No. 83 -2015 dated September 5, 2017 entitled "Protocols and Procedures in the Promulgation,
Publication, and Posting on the Websites of Decisions, Final Resolutions, and Final Orders using Fictitious
Names/Personal Circumstances.
2
Rollo, pp . 23-25.
3
CA rollo, pp. 147-165. Penned by Associate Justice Nina G. Antonio-Valenzuela and concurred in by
Associate Justices Apolinario D. Bruselas, Jr. and Loius P. Acosta.
4
Records (Criminal Case No. 33-09), pp . 156-200.
5
Geographical location is blotted out pursuant to Supreme Court Amended Circular No. 83-2015.
Decision 2 G.R. No. 255491

The Antecedents:

On November 3, 2008, accused-appellant was charged with Qualified

Statutory Rape for having carnal knowledge of his minor daughter AAA, 6
against the latter's will on three different occasions. The accusatory portions of
the three separate Informations 7 filed against accused-appellant read as follows:

Criminal Case No. 33-09:

That on or about the 13 th day of March 2007, in

, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, motivated by lust and with lewd
design, with the use of force, threat and intimidation and taking advantage of his
moral ascendancy over his eleven (11) year old daughter [AAA] (born on May
14, 1995), did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal
knowledge of said [AAA] by inserting his penis into her vagina, against her will
and consent, to her damage and prejudice.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 8

Criminal Case No. 34-09:

That on or about the year 2004, in

_ , Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, motivated by lust and with lewd design, with the use of
force, threat and intimidation and taking advantage of his moral ascendancy over
his nine (9) year old daughter [AAA] (born on May 14, 1995), did then and there
willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of said [AAA] by
inserting his penis into her vagina, against her will and consent, to her damage
and prejudice.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 9

Criminal Case No. 35-09:

That on or about the year 2005, in

_ , Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the

6 "The identity of the victim or any information which could establish or compromise her identity, as well as
those of her immediate family or household members, shall be withheld pursuant to Republic Act No. 7610,
An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination, Providing Penalties for its Violation, and for Other Purposes; Republic Act No. 9262, An
Act Defining Violence Against Women and Their Children, Providing for Protective Measures for Victims,
Prescribing Penalties Therefor, and for Other Purposes; and Section 40 of A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC, known
as the Rule on Violence against Women and their Children, effective November 15, 2004." (People v.
Dumadag, 667 Phil. 664, 669 [2011 ]).
7 Records (Criminal Case No. 33-09), p. I; records (Criminal Case No. 34-09), p. I; records (Criminal Case
No. 35-09), p. 1
8
Records (Criminal Case No. 33-09), p. l
9
Records (Criminal Case No. 34-09), p. 1
 Decision 3 G.R. No. 255491

above-named accused, motivated by lust and with lewd design, with the use of
force, threat and intimidation and taking advantage of his moral ascendancy over
his ten (10) year old daughter [AAA] (born on May 14, 1995), did then and there
willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of said [AAA] by
inserting his penis into her vagina, against her will and consent, to her damage
and prejudice.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 10

Accused-appellant pleaded not guilty to the crimes charged during his

11
arraignment. Joint pre-trial and trial ensued. 12 The prosecution presented the
following: (1) AAA; (2) BBB, mother of AAA; (3) CCC, brother of AAA; and
(4) Medico-Legal Officer Marianne S. Ebdane (Officer Ebdane). 13 The defense
presented accused-appellant as its sole witness. 14

Version of the Prosecution

At around 2:00 p.m. of March 13, 2 0 0 ~ l l a n t , AAA, CCC

and their other siblings were at their house i n - · While AAA was
washing the dishes, accused-appellant asked CCC to take his other siblings on
a stroll around their place. CCC heeded the instruction of his father. Accused-
appellant and AAA were thus left in the house. 15 While strolling around, CCC
passed by their house and observed that the windows and door were covered or
with tabing. 16

Meanwhile, inside the house, accused-appellant ordered AAA to change

her clothes and to wear a skirt. Thereafter, accused-appellant told AAA to lie
on the floor. He then removed his clothes, applied cooking oil on his penis,
removed AAA's skirt and underwear, and inserted his penis into AAA's vagina.
Despite the pain she felt, AAA remained silent for fear that her father might
hurt her. After the bestial act, accused-appellant told AAA to change her
clothes. 17

CCC's sister, DDD, cried for milk so they decided to return home. On their
way home, they met accused-appellant who is on his way to - · CCC and
his siblings proceeded home. Upon arriving home, CCC was suspicious of the

10
Records (Criminal Case No. 35-09), p. I
11
CA rollo, p. 149.
12 Id.
13 Id.
14
Id. at 152.
15
Id. at 150.
16
Records (Criminal Case No. 33-09), p. 165.
17
TSN, October 5, 2009, pp. 8-9. See also CA rollo, p. 150.
Decision 4 G.R. No. 255491

tabing so he asked AAA what she and accused-appellant were doing when they
were out. AAA, however, did not answer him. 18

At around 7:00 p.m., BBB, their mother, arrived home from

- · CCC informed her of the tabing that he saw on the windows. BBB then
asked AAA about it. AAA disclosed that accused-appellant defiled her. BBB
brought AAA to the barangay hall, then to the municipal hall, where they met
with a representative from the Department of Social Welfare and Development
(DSWD). Thereafter, AAA was brought to Camp Crame for examination. 19

Officer Ebdane examined AAA. In her Medico Legal Report No. RO7-
559,20 Officer Ebdane found neither laceration nor injury on AAA's vagina at
the time of the examination, but such evaluation could not exclude possible
sexual abuse. She explained that lacerations or injuries might not be evident
despite the fact of sexual abuse due to certain factors such as age and health of
the victim. Fmiher, the hymen of an 11-year old is similar to a rubber band that
can be stretched without evident injury. 21

AAA testified that accused-appellant's bestial act of inserting his penis

inside her vagina and against her will similarly happened in 2004 when she was
still nine years old, and in 2005, when she was 10 years old. 22 Hence, the filing
of three separate Informations against accused-appellant.

Version of the Defense

From 9:00 a.m. until 3:00 p.m. of March 13, 2007, accused-appellant was
with BBB and EEE at the seaside in . Accused-a ellant was
repairing a baklad until BBB .had to leave for so he
accompanied her to the bus terminal. Thereafter, accused-appellant went to his
live-in paiiner a1 Fffffl
where he slept until 6:30 p.m. When his live-in partner
woke him up, he went to the seaside, stayed there for two hours, went back to
23
- and slept again.

Meanwhile, a commotion happened in the neighboring house that

awakened accused-appellant. Police officers handcuffed accused-appellant's
brother and asked the latter if he were accused-appellant. Accused-appellant
immediately left when he knew that the police officers were looking for him.

18 Records (Criminal Case No. 33-09), p. 165. See also TSN, August 17, 2009, pp. 5-12.
19 TSN, August 3, 2009, pp. 11- 16. See also CA rollo, p. 15 I.
20 Records (Criminal Case No. 34-09), p. 12.
21 Records (Criminal Case No. 33-09), pp. 172-173. See also TSN, November 4, 2011, pp. 13-14.
22
Id. at 170-172.
23 TSN, October 5, 2012, pp. 5-9. See also CA rollo, pp. 152-153.
Decision 5 G.R. No. 255491

First, he went to the seaside and sta ed there for an hour, went back home to
~ s things, headed to to collect a debt, then to in
- where stayed for two da s. He went back to to borrow money
from his sister then went to . When he received a text message
that his family filed a complaint against him, he traveled back to - to clear
his name. 24

Accused-appellant denied having carnal knowledge of AAA. He imputed

ill motive on the part of BBB. He contended that BBB was jealous and angry at
him for having an affair with another woman. Hence, the complaint against
him. 25

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court:

In an Omnibus Judgment26 dated August 9, 2017, the trial court found

accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt for Qualified Statutory Rape.
The testimony ofAAA was straightforward, categorical and spontaneous during
the direct and cross-examination. Sincerity and t1uthfulness were evident in her
testimony. AAA also positively identified accused-appellant as the person who
defiled her. 27 While no laceration was noted, the trial court resolved that the
medico-legal report was merely corroborative and dispensable, and the
testimony of the victim alone may be sufficient to convict the perpetrator, as
long as credibility was established. 28

Moreover, the trial court found that the prosecution adequately established
the two elements of Statutory Rape. The minority of AAA, and the father-
daughter relationship between accused-appellant and AAA, were alleged in the
informations and proven during trial. 29 The trial comi likewise did not
appreciate the defenses of alibi, denial, and ill motive proffered by accused-
appellant 30

Thefallo of the Omnibus Judgment reads in this wise:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, this Honorable Court, hereby finds

the accused, [XXX], a resident of

24 TSN, October 5, 2012, pp. 10-12. See also CA rollo, p. 153.

25 TSN, October 5, 2012, pp. 13-15. See also CA rollo, p. 153.
26 Records (Criminal Case No. 33-09), pp. 156-200.
27
Id. at 189-191.
28
Id. at 191-192.
29
Id. at 192-194.
30
Id. at 183- I 88.
Decision 6 G.R. No. 255491

1. GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt in Criminal Case No. 33-09, of the

crime of rape under Article 266-A, paragraph 1(b) (sic) in relation to Article 266-
B, paragraph 2, no. 1 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. 8353, and
is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without benefit ofparole,
in accordance with R.A. 9346, ''An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death
Penalty in the Philippines", and is ordered to pay the private complainant
[AAA], his biological daughter, Seventy Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as
civil indemnity, Seventy Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as moral damages,
and Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) as exemplary damages, all with
interest at the rate of Six Percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this
judgement (sic). No costs.

2. GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt in Criminal Case No. 34-09, of the

crime of rape under Article 266-A, paragraph 1(b) (sic) in relation to Article 266-
B, paragraph 2, no. 1 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. 8353, and
is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without benefit ofparole,
in accordance with R.A. 9346, "An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death
Penalty in the Philippines", and is ordered to pay the private complainant
[AAA], his biological daughter, Seventy Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as
civil indemnity, Seventy Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as moral damages,
and Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) as exemplary damages, all with
interest at the rate of Six Percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this
judgement (sic). No costs.

3. GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt in Criminal Case No. 35-09, of the

crime of rape under Article 266-A, paragraph 1(b) (sic) in relation to Article 266-
B, paragraph 2, no. 1 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. 8353, and
is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without benefit ofparole,
in accordance with R.A. 9346, "An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death
Penalty in the Philippines", and is ordered to pay the private complainant
[AAA], his biological daughter, Seventy Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as
civil indemnity, Seventy Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as moral damages,
and Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) as exemplary damages, all with
interest at the rate of Six Percent (6%) per annum from. the date of finality of this
judgement (sic). No costs.

So Ordered. 31

Aggrieved, accused-appellant appealed32 to the CA.

Ruling of the Court of Appeals:

In its September 27, 2019 Decision, 33 the appellate court convicted

accused-appellant for Qualified Statutory Rape, and increased the amount of
34
civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages to Pl 00,000.00 each
for each count.
31
Id. at 198-200.
32 CA rollo, p. 14.
33 Id. at 147-165.
34
Id. at 157 and 163.
Decision 7 G.R. No. 255491

The appellate court maintained that AAA' s narration of her ordeal in the
hands of her father was clear, consistent and credible. On the basis of a natural
and credible testimony of the rape victim, the perpetrator may be convicted of
the crime charged. 35 Furthermore, the prosecution sufficiently proved that there
was carnal knowledge of AAA, a minor, without her consent, perpetrated by
accused-appellant, her father. 36 The appellate court affirmed the corroborative
character of the medico-legal certificate. It also found accused-appellant's
defenses as without merit since they were mere allegations without evidence. 37

The dispositive portion of the appellate court's Decision reads:

ACCORDINGLY, we MODIFY the Decision dated 9 August 2 0 ~

the Regional Trial C o u r t , _ , _ , as follows: ' · .,J

1. Criminal Case No. 33-09: we find the appellant [XXX] GUILTY

beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape punished under Article 266-
A( 1)(d), Revised Penal Code, and sentence him to:

a. imprisonment of the indivisible penalty of Reclusion Perpetua; and

b. to pay AAA Pl00,000.00 (as civil indemnity), Pl00,000.00 (as moral

damages), PI00,000.00 (as exemplary damages);

2. Criminal Case No. 34-09: we find the appellant [XXX] GUILTY

beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape punished under Article 266-
A( l )(d), Revised Penal Code, and sentence him to:

a. imprisonment of the indivisible penalty of Reclusion Perpetua; and

b. to pay AAA Pl00,000.00 (as civil indemnity), Pl00,000.00 (as moral

damages), Pl00,000.00 (as exemplary damages);

3. Criminal Case No. 35-09: we find the appellant [XXX] GUILTY

beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape punished under Article 266-
A(l )(d), Revised Penal Code, and sentence him to:

a. imprisonment of the indivisible penalty of Reclusion Perpetua; and

b. to pay AAA Pl00,000.00 (as civil indemnity), Pl00,000.00 (as moral

damages), Pl00,000.00 (as exemplary damages).

35
Id. at 159.
36
Id.atl59-16I.
37 Id. at 161-162.
Decision 8 G.R. No. 255491

All sums awarded are subject to interest at the rate of 6% per annum from
the finality of thus (sic) Decision, until full payment.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 38

Unrelenting, accused-appellant appealed39 before this Court. The People,

through the Office of the Solicitor General, manifested that it would be adopting
its Appellee's Brief as its Supplemental Brief. 40

In his Brief, 41 accused-appellant insists that the trial court failed to

consider the inconsistent testimony of AAA, where she testified that her mother
knew of the gruesome incident from her brother, and yet she testified that her
brother did not actually see the incident. 42 He also argues that the alleged rape
did not happen because the physical evidence as found by Officer Ebdane was
contrary to AAA's contention. 43 As to the other incidents of rape, accused-
appellant asserts that AAA's narration sounded uniform, memorized and
rehearsed. 44 He concludes that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt because
AAA failed to give a clear, positive, and convincing testimony, and hence, his
defense of denial is significant. Accused-appellant prays for his acquittal. 45

For its part, the People, in its Brief for the Plaintiff-Appellee,46 reiterates
that appellate courts would generally not disturb the findings of the trial court
with regard to the credibility of witnesses. 47 Moreover, it disproves the claim
that there was inconsistency in the testimony of AAA because she merely said
that it was through her brother that her mother knew of the incident. Even
granting that there was inconsistency, it was merely minor and would not
discount the fact that accused-appellant had carnal knowledge of AAA. 48 Also,
the uniform narration did not necessarily mean that AAA's testimony was
rehearsed or contrived because AAA categorically testified that accused-
appellant had carnal knowledge of her on three separate instances. 49 In
conclusion, the People contends that the prosecution established all the elements
of Qualified Statutory Rape, 50 and that accused-appellant's defenses could not

38
Id. at 163-164.
39
Rollo, pp. 23-25.
40
Id. at 32-33.
41
CA rollo, pp. 43-57.
42
Id. at 51.
43
Id. at 52.
44
Id. at 52-54.
45
Id. at 54-56.
46
Id.atl0S-128.
47
Id. at 117-118.
48
Id. at 119-120.
49
Id. at 120-121.
50
Id. at 121-123.
Decision 9 G.R. No. 255491

be given greater weight over AAA's positive identification. 51

Issue

All told, the sole issue before this Court is whether or not accused-
appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes charged.

Our Ruling

The appeal lacks merit.

This Court affirms the conviction of accused-appellant for Qualified

Statutory Rape in Criminal Case No. 33-09, Criminal Case No. 34-09, and
Criminal Case No. 35-09.

As a preliminary matter, this Court adheres to the well-entrenched

principle that the trial court's factual findings, including its pronouncement as
to the credibility of the witnesses, should be accorded great weight and respect.
This is because trial courts have the opportunity to personally examine and
observe the demeanor, manner, and body language of the witnesses when they
were placed on the witness stand during trial. 52

In this instant case, the trial court categorically emphasized its positive
observation of AAA's credibility during the direct and cross-examination, viz.:

The Court is impressed of the courage of the private complainant as she

recounted her ordeals at the hands of his (sic) own father, the accused in this case.
The victim, the private complainant, was straightforward, categorical and
spontaneous in her answers during direct examination and cross-examination.
Her account of her ordeal resonated with sincerity and trnthfulness.

Thus, this Court is convinced of the credibility of the private complainant

as witness to the commission of the very crime perpetrated against her by her
own father, the accused. The cross-examination shows that her answers were
clearly uncoached as they did not stray from her main testimony and she
answered the questions without hesitation. The defense failed to impeach her
credibility in this case. 53

This Court will generally not deviate from these factual findings especially
when the appellate court also stamped its affirmation on the credibility of the

51
Id. at 123-125.
52
See People v. Jagdon, Jr., G.R. No. 242882, September 9, 2020.
53
Records (Criminal Case No. 33-09), p. 190.
Decision 10 G.R. No. 255491

witness. 54 As much as these matters are beyond this Court's sphere, they are
properly within the dmnain of the trial courts. 55

The Court is not swayed by accused-appellant's protestations as to AAA's

credibility. In any case, the alleged inconsistencies were inconsequential to the
commission of the crime. This Court reiterates that inconsistencies on one's
testimony will only result to reasonable doubt when the detail pertains to an
essential element of the crime or to the identity of the offender. 56 As clarified in
People v. Nocido, 57 minor inconsistencies may even work to enhance the
credibility of a witness:

For as long as the testimonies of AAA are coherent and intrinsically

believable, the minor inconsistencies in her narration of facts do not detract from
their essential credibility. Rather, the minor inconsistencies enhance credibility
as they manifest spontaneity and lack of scheming. 58

Articles 266-A and 266-B of the RPC, as amended by Republic Act No.
(RA) 8353, 59 read:

Article 266-A. Rape; When And How Committed. - Rape is Committed

1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the
following circumstances:

xxxx

d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is

demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.

xxxx

Article 266-B. Penalties. - xx x.

xxxx

The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed
with any of the following aggravating/qualifying circumstances:

1) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is
a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity
within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the
victim;

54 CA rollo, p. 159.
55 People v. Jagdon, Jr., supra note 52.
56 See People v. Delos Santos, Jr., G.R. No. 248929, November 9, 2020.
57 See G.R. No. 240229, June 17, 2020.
58
See id.
59 Entitled "AN ACT EXPANDING THE DEFINITION OF THE CRIME OF RAPE, RECLASSIFYING THE SAME AS A
CRIME AGAINST PERSONS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ACT NO. 3815, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN
AS THE REVISED PENAL CODE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES." Approved: September 30, 1997.
Decision 11 G.R. No. 255491

xxxx

Statutory Rape has the following elements: (1) that a man had carnal
knowledge of a woman; and (2) that the offended party is under 12 years of age.
Moreover, the penalty to be imposed is death when one of the aggravating or
qualifying circumstances is present. In this instant case, AAA is under 18 years
of age and the offender is her parent.

All these elements and qualifying circumstances were alleged in the three
Informations, and were proven by the prosecution during trial.

On the first element, accused-appellant had carnal knowledge of AAA on

three different occasions. There is carnal knowledge even with the slightest
penetration or the mere touching of the lips of the pudendum of the woman by
a man's genitalia. 60 AAA testified that accused-appellant inserted his penis into
her vagina61 on three occasions. 62

Officer Ebdane's findings of the absence of laceration or injury in AAA's

genitalia is not fatal to the prosecution. It is settled that a medical report is
dispensable in proving the commission of rape. In any event, Officer Ebdane
even confirmed that sexual abuse could not be cancelled out even if no injuries
or lacerations were found. 63 People v. ManaligocfA is instructive on this:

Moreover, even if the Court disregards the medico-legal certificate, the

same would still not be sufficient to acquit accused-appellant. It has been
repeatedly held that the medical report is by no means controlling. A
medical examination of the victim is not indispensable in the prosecution for
rape, and no law requires a medical examination for the successful
prosecution thereof. The medical examination of the victim or the
presentation of the medical certificate is not essential to prove the
commission of rape, as the testimony of the victim alone, if credible, is sufficient
to convict the accused of the crime. The medical examination of the victim as
well as the medical certificate is merely corroborative in character. 65 (Emphasis
supplied)

Based on AAA's straightforward declaration, this Court, therefore,

concludes that accused-appellant indeed had carnal knowledge of her against
her will. Accused-appellant's moral ascendancy, being the father of AAA, takes
the place of violence or intimidation. 66 Hence, the first element has been proven.

60
See People v. Mendoza, G.R. No. 239892, June I 0, 2020.
61
TSN, October 5, 2009, pp. 8-9. See also CA rollo, p. 150.
62
Records (Criminal Case No. 33-09), p. 170-172.
63
Id. at 172-173. See also TSN, November 4, 2011, pp. 13-14.
64
831 Phil. 204 (2018).
65
Id. at 213.
66
See People v. Caba/es, G.R. No. 249149, December 2, 2020.

7. /
Decision 12 G.R. No. 255491

With regard to the second element, AAA was below 12 years old when the
three rape incidents happened. Her Certificate of Live Birth67 reflects that she
was born on May 14, 1995. Hence, she was nine, 10, and 11 years old,
respectively, when the rape incidents happened in 2004, 2005, and 2007,
respectively.

As to the presence of the qualifying circumstance, the father-daughter

relationship between accused-appellant and AAA was also established through
the latter's Certificate of Live Birth,68 where it was indicated that the father is
accused-appellant. Likewise, BBB testified in open court that AAA' s father was
accused-appellant. 69 Since this qualifying circumstance was properly alleged in
the three informations, and proven during trial, this Court holds that accused-
appellant committed Qualified Statutory Rape under Article 266-A(l )( d), in
relation to Article 266-B(l) of the RPC, as amended by RA 8353.

Under Aiiicle 266-B, accused-appellant would have been meted the

penalty of death if not for the passage of RA 9346. 70 Accused-appellant is thus
sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for
parole71 for each count. He is also ordered to pay AAA the amounts of
Pl 00,000.00 as civil indemnity, Pl 00,000.00 as moral damages, and
Pl00,000.00 as exemplary damages for each count. 72 Interest at the rate of six
percent ( 6%) is imposed on all monetary awards from the date of finality of this
Decision until fully paid.

WHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED. The September 27, 2019

Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 09868 is
AFFIRMED. Accordingly, accused-appellant XXX is found GUILTY beyond
reasonable doubt for three counts of Qualified Statutory Rape. He is sentenced
to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, without eligibility for parole, for
each count. He is ordered to pay AAA the following: (1) Pl00,000.00 as civil
indemnity; (2) Pl 00,000.00 as moral damages; and (3) Pl 00,000.00 as
exemplary damages. Said amounts shall earn legal interest at the rate of six
percent (6%) per annum from the finality of this Decision until full satisfaction
thereof.

67
Records (Criminal Case No. 34-09), p. 14.
68 Id.
69 Records (Criminal Case No. 33-09), p. 161-163.
70 Entitled "AN Acr PROHIBITING THE IMPOSITION OF DEATH PENALTY IN THE PHILIPPINES." Approved: June
24,2006
71 A.M. No. 15-08-02-SC or the Guidelines for the Proper Use of the Phrase "Without Eligibility for Parole"
in Indivisible Penalties: "If at all, the qualification of "without eligibility for parole" may be applied to
qualify reclusion perpetua in order to emphasize that the appellant should have been sentenced to suffer the
death penalty had it not been for R.A. No. 9346.
72
See People v. Gaa, 810 Phil. 860, 871 (2017).
Decision 13 G.R. No. 255491

SO ORDERED.

WE CONCUR:

ESTELA M.~~RNABE
Senior Associate Justice
Chairperson

. OSARIO
Assoc ate Justice

'
)Ulldll~
IDAS P. MARQUEZ
ssociate Justice
Decision 14 G.R. No. 255491

ATTESTATION

I attest that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in
consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the
Court's Division.

ESTELA M. ~.~ERNABE
Senior Associate Justice
Chairperson

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution and the Division
Chairperson's Attestation, I certify that the conclusions in the above Decision
had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of
the opinion of the Court's Division.