G.R. Nos. 137753-56 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. NILO ARDON, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

Accordingly, on the foregoing considerations and in the light of the present law in force, this Court finds the accused Nilo Ardon guilty beyond reasonable doubt of four counts of rape, one rape committed sometime in 1988, two rapes committed in October 11, 1994 and another one rape in October 12, 1994. The rape committed sometime in 1988 is considered as statutory rape as the offended party was still six years old at the time the crime charged has been committed, and in view of the abolition of death penalty in the 1987 Constitution, the accused Nilo Ardon is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua in Criminal Case No. 316. For the three counts of rape under Criminal Cases Nos. 317, 318 and 319, said accused is hereby sentenced with the supreme penalty of DEATH for each of the three cases pursuant to Sec. 11 of R.A. 7659 which provides that where the victim of the crime of rape is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is, inter alia, the parent of the victim, the death penalty shall be imposed. The aforesaid accused is further ordered to indemnify the offended party, Jennilyn Ardon, the amount of P50,000.00 as moral damages and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages in each cases filed against him and to pay the cost. By reason of the imposition of the extreme penalty of death in Criminal Cases Nos. 317, 318 and 319, the cases are now before us for automatic review. The judgment in Criminal Case No. 316, where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, will be considered to have been appealed to us despite absence of notice of appeal which was necessary pursuant to Section 3(c) of Rule 122 of the Rules of Court, considering that only one decision was rendered in these four consolidated cases. [7] In the Appellant's Brief NILO interposes as his lone assignment of error that the trial court erred in convicting him of three counts of rape in Criminal Cases Nos. 317, 318 and 319 despite the absence of force and intimidation. He claims that the prosecution failed to prove resistance on the part of the victim or the use of force or intimidation on his part when the alleged three rapes were committed. In the Appellee's Brief, the Office of the Solicitor General recommends that, except for the award of damages which must be increased, the decision of the trial court convicting NILO of four counts of rape be affirmed, the same being supported by the evidence and consistent with law. We affirm NILO' s conviction. The Court has repeatedly held that it will not interfere with the trial court's determination of the credibility of witnesses, unless there appears on record some fact or circumstance of weight and influence which had been overlooked or the significance of which has been misinterpreted. [8] The reason for this is that the trial court is in a better position to do so because it heard the witnesses testify before it and had every opportunity to observe their demeanor and deportment on the witness stand. [9] We have careful