G.R. No. 212929 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. ENRIQUE GALVEZ, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE , in the light of the foregoing, accused is hereby found GUILTY for four (4) counts of sexual abuse under RA 7610 and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion temporal medium to reclusion perpetua for each act; and four (4) counts of rape under the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each act. SO DECIDED . [7] The RTC, relying on the testimony of AAA and the Medico-legal certificate issued by Dr. Joan Marie C. Echaluse, found accused-appellant guilty of the crimes charged. [8] The RTC gave weight to AAAs testimony which it found to be straightforward, honest, and consistent on all material points. The RTC added that based on AAAs testimony alone the prosecution succeeded in proving all the elements of the crimes. [9] The CA affirmed with modifications the Decision of the RTC. The CA convicted accused-appellant of the crimes of rape only on the ground that the accused may not be subjected to criminal liability twice, for both sexual abuse under Section 5 (b), Article III, R.A. No. 7610 and rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, for the same act. [10] The dispositive portion of the CA Decision reads: WHEREFORE , the Decision of the trial court is AFFIRMED , with the following MODIFICATIONS : a.) Accused-appellant is CONVICTED of four (4) counts of Qualified Rape under the Revised Penal Code in Criminal Case Nos. 228-95, 229-95, 230-95, and 231-95; b.) Accused-appellant is to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua , for each count of Qualified Rape; c.) Accused-appellant is to pay private complainant AAA the amount of Php 75,000.00 as Moral Damages, for each count of Qualified Rape; d.) Accused-appellant is to pay private complainant AAA the amount of Php 30,000.00 as Exemplary Damages, for each count of Qualified Rape; and, e.) Accused-appellant is to pay private complainant AAA the amount of Php 75,000.00 as Civil Indemnity, for each count of Qualified Rape. SO ORDERED . [11] The CA noted that the testimony of AAA was corroborated by the findings of Dr. Echaluse, who conducted the physical examination of AAA. [12] The CA added that accused-appellant was positively identified by AAA as the one who had sexually forced himself on her on four occasions. [13] The CA rejected the argument of accused-appellant that the testimony of AAA was unbelievable and rehearsed. The CA noted the RTCs observation that the testimony of AAA was straightforward, honest, and consistent on all material points. [14] The CA also stated that it saw no ill-motive on the part of the prosecution witnesses and that the uncorroborated and weak defense of denial asserted by accused-appellant was negative and self-serving evidence undeserving of weight in law. [15] Hence, this appeal. The issues for our consideration are: Whether or not accused-appellant is guilty of four counts of qualified rape. Whether or not the award of civil indemnity and damages to AAA is proper. This Court affirms the conviction of a