The appellant, Alfredo Delabajan, appealed his conviction of three counts of rape. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified it to six counts. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal but modified the counts and damages. It found the prosecution established the elements of rape through the victim's clear and convincing testimony identifying the appellant, which was corroborated by medical evidence. It also found the appellant and his co-accused conspired in the rapes, as their acts demonstrated a common plan. The Court upheld the conviction.
The appellant, Alfredo Delabajan, appealed his conviction of three counts of rape. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified it to six counts. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal but modified the counts and damages. It found the prosecution established the elements of rape through the victim's clear and convincing testimony identifying the appellant, which was corroborated by medical evidence. It also found the appellant and his co-accused conspired in the rapes, as their acts demonstrated a common plan. The Court upheld the conviction.
The appellant, Alfredo Delabajan, appealed his conviction of three counts of rape. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified it to six counts. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal but modified the counts and damages. It found the prosecution established the elements of rape through the victim's clear and convincing testimony identifying the appellant, which was corroborated by medical evidence. It also found the appellant and his co-accused conspired in the rapes, as their acts demonstrated a common plan. The Court upheld the conviction.
The appellant, Alfredo Delabajan, appealed his conviction of three counts of rape. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified it to six counts. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal but modified the counts and damages. It found the prosecution established the elements of rape through the victim's clear and convincing testimony identifying the appellant, which was corroborated by medical evidence. It also found the appellant and his co-accused conspired in the rapes, as their acts demonstrated a common plan. The Court upheld the conviction.
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as doc, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 3
G.R. No.
192180 March 21, 2012
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. ALIAS KINO LASCANO (at ar!"# a$% ALFRE&O &ELA'A(AN a)a* TA'O+'O+, Accused. ALFRE&O &ELA'A(AN, Appellant. D E C I S I O N 'RION, J.: We decide the appeal, filed by Alfredo Delabajan appellant!, fro" the decision # of the Court of Appeals CA! dated $ay %&, %''( in CA)*.+. CE,)C+)-.C. No. ''%%.. /he CA decision affir"ed 0ith "odification the Nove"ber %(, %''# decision % of the +e1ional /rial Court +/C!, ,ranch %2, Allen, Northern Sa"ar, and found the appellant 1uilty beyond reasonable doubt of three 2! counts of rape, sentencin1 hi" to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count. /he +/C Decision In its Nove"ber %(, %''# decision, the +/C found the appellant 1uilty beyond reasonable doubt of three 2! counts of rape. It 1ave credence to the testi"ony of AAA 2
that alias 3ino 4ascano and the appellant too5 turns in rapin1 her. Accordin1 to the trial court, the victi" reco1ni6ed her assailants throu1h their respective voices. /he trial court held that a public accusation by a blind 7ilipina 0hose virtue has been unble"ished is 0orthy of belief. It also disre1arded the appellant8s alibi, as he failed to sho0 that it 0as physically i"possible for hi" to be at the scene of the cri"e. /he +/C sentenced the appellant to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count, and to pay the victi" the a"ounts of 9&','''.'' as civil inde"nity and 9&','''.'' as "oral da"a1es, also for each count. : /he CA Decision On inter"ediate appellate revie0, the CA affir"ed the +/C decision 0ith the "odification that the appellant is 1uilty beyond reasonable doubt of si; (! counts of <ualified rape. It held that the appellant actively participated 0ith 3ino in rapin1 AAA= he tied the victi"8s hands, and then held her feet 0hen 3ino 0as rapin1 her. In addition, AAA8s testi"ony 0as corroborated by the "edical findin1s of Dr. Ethel Si"eon. /he appellate court also rejected the appellant8s alibi in li1ht of the victi"8s positive declaration, and for the appellant8s failure to sho0 that it 0as physically i"possible for hi" to be at the locus cri"inis. & Our +ulin1 We dis"iss the appeal, but "odify the counts of rape co""itted and the a0arded inde"nities. Sufficiency of 9rosecution Evidence 7or a char1e of rape to prosper under Article %(()A of the +evised 9enal Code, as a"ended, the prosecution "ust prove that #! the offender had carnal 5no0led1e of a 0o"an= and %! he acco"panied such act throu1h force, threat, or inti"idation, or 0hen she 0as deprived of reason or other0ise unconscious, or 0hen she 0as under t0elve years of a1e or 0as de"ented. ( In her Septe"ber %', %''' testi"ony, AAA narrated in detail ho0 the appellant and 3ino threatened to 5ill her, and then too5 turns in rapin1 her. AAA e;plained that she reco1ni6ed her assailants throu1h their respective voices. We e"phasi6e that the victi", althou1h blind, 5ne0 the identities of her t0o assailants because they 0ere her nei1hbors. AAA e;plained that 3ino and the appellant often 0ent to her residence in Sitio $ara1a) as because they 0ere the friends of her brother. Notably, the appellant ad"itted that he tal5ed to AAA on "any occasions. We vie0 AAA8s testi"ony to be clear, convincin1 and credible considerin1 especially the corroboration it received fro" the "edical certificate and testi"ony of Dr. Si"eon. Our e;a"ination of the records sho0s no indication that 0e should vie0 the victi"8s testi"ony in a suspicious li1ht. It bears stressin1 that identification of an accused by his voice has been accepted, particularly in cases 0here, as in this case, the victi" has 5no0n the perpetrator for a lon1 ti"e= > for the blind voice reco1nition "ust be a special sense that has been developed to a very hi1h de1ree. ,esides, it is inconceivable that a blind 0o"an 0ould concoct a story of defloration, allo0 an e;a"ination of her private parts and subject herself to public trial or ridicule if she has not, in truth, been a victi" of rape and i"pelled to see5 justice for the 0ron1 done to her. /hus, to us, the prosecution positively established the ele"ents of rape re<uired under Article %(()A of the +evised 9enal Code. 7irst, the appellant and 3ino succeeded in havin1 carnal 5no0led1e 0ith the victi". AAA 0as steadfast in her assertion that both the appellant and 3ino had raped her, as a result of 0hich, she felt pain. She also felt that so"ethin1 ?stic5y? ca"e out of the appellant8s and 3ino8 private parts. Second, the assailants e"ployed force, threat and inti"idation in satisfyin1 their bestial desires. Accordin1 to AAA, the appellant and 3ino threatened to 5ill her if she refused to obey the". /he 9resence of Conspiracy We a1ree 0ith the CA that the appellant and 3ino conspired in se;ually assaultin1 AAA. ?Conspiracy e;ists 0hen the acts of the accused de"onstrate a co""on desi1n to0ards the acco"plish"ent of the sa"e unla0ful purpose.? . In the present case, the acts of 3ino and of the appellant clearly indicate a unity of action@ #! 3ino and the appellant entered the victi"8s house at around A@'' p.".= %! 3ino and the appellant ordered the victi" to lie do0n, and threatened to 5ill her if she refused to do so= 2! 3ino undressed AAA, 0hile the appellant tied her hands= :! the appellant held AAA8s feet, 0hile 3ino inserted his penis into the victi"8s private parts= and &! the appellant raped AAA after0ards. Clearly, the appellant and 3ino perfor"ed specific acts 0ith such closeness and coordination as to indicate an un"ista5ably co""on purpose or desi1n to co""it the felony. /hus, they are liable for t0o %! counts of rape on account of a clear conspiracy bet0een the", sho0n by their obvious concerted efforts to perpetrate, one after the other, the rapes. Each of the" is responsible not only for the rape co""itted personally by hi" but also for the rape co""itted by the other as 0ell. /he Appellant8s Defenses
08-07-23 Galdjie V Darwish (SC052737) at The Los Angeles Superior Court - Case Summary (Not A Formal Court Record) As Printed From The Online Public Access System S