G.R. No. 175480 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. CONRADO BARANGAN Y GENERALAO, ACCUSED-. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Wherefore, premises considered, the Court finds the accused, Conrado Generalao Baranggan, guilty beyond reasonable doubt as a principal of the crime of rape under Article 266-A, paragraph (1), (a), of the Revised Penal Code, with the aggravating circumstance of dwelling, and hereby sentences him to reclusion perpetua and its accessory penalties; and to pay the costs. The accused is ordered to pay to the victim, AAA, the sum of P 50,000.00 as civil indemnity and the further sum of P 50,000.00 as moral damages. [18] In adjudging accused-appellant guilty of the crime charged, the RTC gave credence to the evidence of the prosecution and declared that: Since it was admitted that the accused engaged in sexual intercourse with the complainant, the burden lay upon him to prove by clear and convincing proof that it was with her consent. This (sic) the accused failed to do to the satisfaction of the court. x x x x [E]ven assuming arguendo that the complainant had lovers and was no longer a virgin, this gave no license to the accused to force himself on a defenseless girl. The victim who was only fifteen years old was not shown to possess the shrewdness and callousness to concoct a story of rape. AAA appeared to be a simple country girl who would not endure physical examination and public trial if her story were untrue. She had absolutely no motive to testify falsely against the accused. Her testimony is entitled to full faith and credence (citation omitted). [19] And in the end concluded that: It was satisfactorily established that the accused had carnal knowledge of his victim by means of force and intimidation and without the latters consent. [20] On 2 May 2002, accused-appellant seasonably filed a Notice of Appeal [21] before the RTC. Conformably with People v. Mateo , [22] however, in a Resolution dated 20 September 2004, [23] we directed the transfer of this case to the Court of Appeals for intermediate review. Affirming in toto the judgment of the RTC, the Court of Appeals confirmed accused-appellants conviction in a Decision dated 30 June 2006, in CA-G.R. CR. HC. No. 00198-MIN. The fallo of the Court of Appeals decision reads: WHEREFORE, all the foregoing considered, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit and the assailed Decision is hereby AFFIRMED in toto . [24] The present case is again before us for our final disposition. Accused-appellant is still seeking the reversal of the decision of the RTC, as affirmed by the Court of Appeals, finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape on the lone assignment of error stating: THE COURT A QUO ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME OF RAPE. [25] Essentially, it is his contention that the evidence presented by the prosecution was not sufficient to establish the existence of the crime of rape. In his Brief, he avers that AAAs accusation of rape, vis-à-vis her lack of physical injuries and her reputation, do not establish occurrence o