G.R. No. 208676 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. ALLAN MENALING Y CANEDO ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE , the foregoing considered, judgment is hereby rendered finding accused Allan Menaling guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of qualified rape in Criminal Case No. 353-2006, for which he is sentenced to suffer the maximum penalty of reclusion perpetua . On the other hand, due to reasonable doubt, said accused is acquitted of the same crime in Criminal Case No. 354-2006. [19] Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal on 21 December 2010. [20] On 26 November 2012, the Court of Appeals rendered the assailed decision affirming with modification the trial court's judgment, viz .: WHEREFORE , premises considered, the instant appeal is hereby DENIED . The Decision dated November 23, 2010 of the RTC, Branch 73, Olongapo City is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that in addition to the maximum penalty of reclusion perpetua , accused-appellant Allan Menaling y Canedo is further ORDERED to pay private complainant AAA Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as civil indemnity, Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) as moral damages, and Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) as exemplary damages. [21] Appellant filed the instant appeal. In a Resolution [22] dated 11 November 2013, appellant and the Officer of the Solicitor General (OSG) were asked to file their respective supplemental briefs if they so desired. OSG manifested that it was adopting its brief filed before the appellate court [23] while appellant filed his Supplemental Brief arguing that AAA's initial testimony regarding the rape incident is incredulous. Appellant asserts that AAA's narration that she was raped by her father in the presence of her mother is preposterous because no mother would keep quiet and act nonchalantly after having witnessed the abuse of her daughter. Appellant also points out that AAA's mother testified that she was in Batangas on the day of the alleged rape. Appellant also questions the actuations of AAA during the rape incident. Appellant asks why AAA did not scream or offer any resistance despite the proximity of her siblings at that time. Appellant stresses that AAA and BBB had the motive to falsely charge him because they feared him. [24] It is a well-settled rule that appellate courts will generally not disturb the factual findings of the trial court considering that it is in a better position to decide the question, having heard the witnesses themselves and observed their deportment and manner of testifying during the trial. [25] We have carefully reviewed the records of the case and we find no reason to depart from this established rule. Articles 266-A and 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act (R.A.) No. 8353, [26] define and punish rape as follows: Article 266-A. Rape; When and How committed . - Rape is committed - 1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: Through force, threat or intimidation; When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; By means of fraud