G.R. No. 207946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. ALFREDO REYES ALIAS "BOY REYES," ACCUSED-.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises all considered, the court finds the evidence of the prosecution sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, accused Alfredo Reyes alias "Boy Reyes" is hereby found guilty of the crime of Rape with Homicide as he is charged in this case beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, he is hereby sentenced to undergo the penalty of imprisonment of reclusion perpetua . He is further ordered to pay the heirs of his deceased victim, Lerma Leonora, the amount of P75,000.00 as indemnity for her death and the amount of P30,000.00 as reasonable expenses for her wake and burial. [23] The Ruling of the CA Aggrieved with the decision of the RTC, Reyes appealed to the CA, Cagayan de Oro City, raising the sole issue on whether he was appropriately convicted of rape with homicide. [24] The CA, through its Twenty-Second Division, accorded respect to the findings of fact of the trial court in the absence of clear and convincing evidence that the latter ignored facts and circumstances which, if considered on appeal, would have reversed or modified the outcome of the case. It ruled that, although Charmaine was only a child, the determination of her competence and capability as a witness rested primarily with the trial judge. On the other hand, it found that the defense proffered by Reyes that his house was robbed was but a make-believe scenario to deny his responsibility for the crime done to Lerma. Thus, the appeal of Reyes was resolved [25] as follows: FOR THESE REASONS, the appeal is DENIED. The 28 October 2009 Decision in Criminal Case No. 2146-S is MODIFIED insofar as the penalty and the award of damages are concerned. Accordingly, accused Alfredo Reyes alias "Boy Reyes" is sentenced to an imprisonment of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. Further, he is ordered to pay the heirs of the victim, Lerma Leonora, the amount of P100,000.00 as civil indemnity, P25,000.00 as temperate damages, and P75,000.00 as moral damages. [26] THE RULING OF THE COURT The petition has no merit. Charmaine was a credible witness with a credible testimony. Reyes primarily assailed the credibility of Charmaine on the following grounds: (a) she revealed her knowledge of the incident only a year after it had happened; [27] (b) her testimony was replete with serious improbabilities which cast doubts on the veracity of her allegations; [28] (c) she was not questioned by police officers and relatives as to her knowledge of the incident considering that she was with Lerma at the time the incident transpired; [29] (d) granting that he was the author of the crime, it was impossible that he would still allow her to remain where she was after having witnessed the fatal incident; [30] (e) she was not sure where the incident happened; [31] and (f) she gave opposing testimony on the mental and physical condition of Lerma during the incident. [32] In People v. Pareja , [33] the Court reiterated the guidelines that have over time