G.R. NO. 169873 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. NORBERTO ASTROLOGO Y DE DIOS, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Court finds the [appellant] Norberto Astrologo y De Dios GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape, as defined and penalized under Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code, and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment of reclusion perpetua. The [appellant] is likewise ordered to pay [AAA] the following amounts: (1) P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; and (2) P75,000.00 as moral damages. [12] The records of this case were originally transmitted to this Court on appeal. In his brief, the appellant's lone assignment of error was, the trial court gravely erred in convicting the appellant for the crime of rape. [13] Pursuant to People v. Mateo, [14] the records of the present case were transferred to the Court of Appeals for appropriate action and disposition. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals, taking into consideration the assignment of error stated by the appellant in his Appellant's Brief and after a thorough study of the records of the case, rendered a Decision on 29 April 2005 affirming the conviction of the appellant with the modification which reduced the amount of civil indemnity and moral damages awarded and ordering the payment of exemplary damages to the victim, AAA. The dispositive portion of the said Decision reads as follows: IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING , the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 102 in Criminal Case No. Q-00-89343 is hereby AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATIONS , to wit: Reducing the civil indemnity from P75,000.00 to P50,000.00; Reducing the award of moral damages from P75,000.00 to P50,000.00; and Appellant Norberto Astrologo y De Dios is ordered to pay [the victim, AAA] P25,000.00 as exemplary damages. Let the records of this case be forwarded to the Supreme Court for automatic review. [15] Aggrieved by the aforesaid Decision of the appellate court, the appellant filed a Notice of Appeal. [16] In view of the said Notice of Appeal, the Court of Appeals forwarded to this Court the records of this case. On 4 September 2006, this Court resolved to accept the present case and to require the parties to simultaneously submit their respective supplemental briefs. The Office of the Solicitor General filed a Manifestation in lieu of Supplemental Brief wherein it re-pleads and re-submits all the arguments in the Appellee's Brief dated 20 May 2004. The appellant also filed a Manifestation in lieu of Supplemental Brief which merely adopts the defenses and arguments raised in the Appellant's Brief. After a careful review of the records of this case, this Court affirms appellant's conviction. A rape charge is a serious matter with pernicious consequences both for the appellant and the complainant; hence, utmost care must be taken in the review of a decision involving conviction of rape. [17] Thus, in reviewing rape cases, the Court is guided by these principles: First , the prosecution has to show the guilt of the accused by proof beyond reasonable doubt or t