G.R. No. 189836 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES -, VS. ROMEO BUSTAMANTE Y ALIGANGA, ACCUSED-. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the Court finds that the evidence on record has fully established with moral certainty the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt of the felony of RAPE, defined and penalized under the provisions of Article 335, of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and hereby sentences him: 1.) To suffer imprisonment of reclusion perpetua; 2.) To indemnify the private complainant [AAA] in the amount of : a. P75,000.00 by way of civil indemnity; b. P50,000.00 as moral damages; and, c. P30,000.00 as exemplary damages. 3.) To pay the costs. [8] Appellant elevated his case to the Court of Appeals in the hope of having a reversal of judgment; however, his appeal was denied in the assailed Decision dated July 31, 2009, the dispositive portion of which states: WHEREFORE, premises considered, instant appeal is DENIED. Accordingly, the assailed Judgment, supra, of the court a quo is hereby AFFIRMED in toto. [9] Hence, the appellant brought the present appeal before this Court wherein he merely adopted the Appellants Brief he submitted to the Court of Appeals in lieu of submitting a Supplemental Brief as permitted by this Court. Appellant assigned two errors for our consideration, to wit: I THE COURT A QUO ERRED IN GIVING FULL CREDENCE TO THE TESTIMONY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINANT. II THE COURT A QUO ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY OF THE CRIME OF RAPE DESPITE THE PROSECUTIONS FAILURE TO PROVE HIS GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. [10] In his appeal, appellant maintains that the accusation against him is baseless and untrue. He claims that, as evidenced by the victims own testimony, AAA filed a false complaint of rape against him mainly due to her ill feelings towards him brought about by his purported repeated physical maltreatment of the victim. The appeal is without merit. It appears that the crux of appellants appeal centers on the credibility of AAAs testimony. Accordingly, appellant implores this Court to review the same and render a judgment reversing his conviction for the crime of rape. It is settled in jurisprudence that in a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the victim that is credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things. [11] Jurisprudence is likewise instructive that the factual findings of the trial court, especially on the credibility of the rape victim, are accorded great weight and respect and will not be disturbed on appeal. [12] In the case at bar, both the trial court and the Court of Appeals found AAA to be a credible witness and her testimony worthy of full faith and credit. After a careful review of the records of this case, we find no reason to deviate from the findings of the lower courts. Since the incident at issue happened prior to the enactment of Republic Act No. 8353, the trial court correctly applied Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code which provides: Art. 335. When and how rape is committed. Rape is committ