People vs. Manaligod (2018)

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. DENNIS MANALIGOD

G.R. No. 218584, April 25, 2018

MARTIRES, J.:

Facts: BBB asked her daughter, AAA, an eight (8) year old minor, to borrow a cellphone charger at the videoke bar where she worked. When AAA came back, BBB saw that AAA had P20.00 in her possession. She asked AAA where it came from and the latter answered that appellant gave it to her. BBB asked why appellant would give her P20.00 but AAA refused to answer because appellant told her not to tell anyone. Upon further questioning by her mother, AAA narrated that appellant brought her to a room at the videoke bar where he removed her clothes and underwear, and then undressed himself. Afterwards, he repeatedly inserted his penis into AAA's vagina. Appellant then told AAA not to tell her mother what had happened and gave her P20.00. Dr. Lorenzo performed the examination and found lacerations in AAA's vagina.

Accused-appellant, through his counsel, manifested that he would not present evidence for his defense.

Issue: Whether or not appellant is guilty of statutory rape under RA 8353.

Ruling: Yes. Statutory rape is committed by sexual intercourse with a woman below 12 years of age regardless of her consent, or the lack of it, to the sexual act. Proof of force, intimidation or consent is unnecessary as they are not elements of statutory rape, considering that the absence of free consent is conclusively presumed when the victim is below the age of 12. Thus, to convict an accused of the crime of statutory rape, the prosecution carries the burden of proving: (a) the age of the complainant; (b) the identity of the accused; and (c) the sexual intercourse between the accused and the complainant.     

As evidenced by her Certificate of Live Birth, AAA was only eight (8) years old at the time she was sexually molested on 24 September 2007. Inside the courtroom, AAA identified accused-appellant as her rapist. AAA's narration was likewise corroborated by Dr. Lorenzo's medical findings as to the existence of hymenal laceration. When the testimony of a rape victim is consistent with the medical findings, there is sufficient basis to conclude that there has been carnal knowledge

Ratio Decidendi: In statutory rape, the law presumes that the victim does not possess discernment and is incapable of giving intelligent consent to the sexual act.

Gist: This is an appeal from the Decision of the CA which affirmed with modification the Decision of the RTC finding appellant guilty of statutory rape.