Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. HENRY BIDOC Y ROQUE

This case has been cited 16 times or more.

	GR No. 189579 2011-09-12	PEOPLE v. JOSELITO ORJE Y BORCE VELASCO JR., J.
It should be stressed at the outset that while it is not a trier of facts and is not wont to winnow and re-asses anew the evidence adduced below, it still behooves the Court, in criminal cases falling under its review jurisdiction pursuant to Article VIII, Section 5(2) of the Constitution,[14] to take a careful and hard look at the testimony given in rape cases. The Court is constantly mindful of the pernicious consequences that a rape charge bears on both the accused and the private complainant.[15] It exposes both to humiliation, hatred and anxieties, more so if the element of kinship comes into the picture. And to stress familiar dicta, an accusation for rape can be made with facility, albeit difficult to prove, but more difficult for the accused, though innocent, to disprove, and that conviction in rape cases usually rests solely on the basis of the testimony of the offended party.[16] This attitude of caution and circumspection becomes all the more compelling in this case in light of the recantation of a key witness, the victim herself.
	GR No. 185839 2010-11-17	PEOPLE v. ARSENIO CABANILLA MENDOZA, J.
consistently adhered to the following guiding principles, to wit: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility, while the accusation is difficult to prove, it is even more difficult for the accused, albeit innocent, to disprove; (2) considering that, in the nature of things, only two persons are usually involved in the crime of rape, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme care; and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must succeed or fail on its own merits, and cannot be allowed to derive strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[23] Corollary to the above principle is the rule that the credibility of the victim is always the single most important issue in the prosecution of a rape case.[24]
	GR No. 190616 2010-06-29	PEOPLE v. PASTOR LLANAS VELASCO JR., J.
The award of PhP 75,000 as civil indemnity ex delicto and the same amount as moral damages for each count of qualified rape is in line with existing case law.[29] In rape cases, the concurrence, as here, of the victim's minority (under 18) and her relationship with the offender is a special qualifying circumstance for which the law prescribes the penalty of death under Art. 266-B[30] of the Revised Penal Code. While the new law prohibits the imposition of death, the penalty provided for a heinous crime is still death and qualified rape is still a heinous offense.[31]
	GR No. 187494 2009-12-23	PEOPLE v. ELMER BARBEROS VELASCO JR., J.
The foregoing positive testimony of AAA, as well as the rage that went into it, are badges of truth and sincerity. When the offended party is of tender age and immature, as here, courts are inclined to give credit to her account of what transpired, considering not only her relative vulnerability but also the shame and embarrassment to which she would be exposed if the matter to which she testified is not true.[20] Judging from her live birth certificate,[21] AAA was 15 years old at the time of the incident, barely 16 or 17 when she took the witness stand in 2000. It is settled that when a girl, more so when she is in her early teens, says she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to prove that rape was committed, and if her testimony meets the test of credibility, that is sufficient to convict the accused.[22] As it were, AAA's testimony as to her hideous experience in the hands of appellant deserves full faith and credit, given as it were in a straightforward and candid manner, unshaken by rigid cross-examination and bereft of inconsistencies, or contradictions in material points.[23]
	GR No. 171452 2008-10-17	PEOPLE v. RICARDO SANTOS AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
266-A, paragraph 1,[80] in relation to Article 266-B, paragraph 2,[81] of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by The Anti-Rape Law of 1997, is carnal knowledge by a man of a woman, with the qualifying circumstance that the same was committed with the use of a deadly weapon. Often the only available evidence thereof is the testimony of the woman that the man, armed with a deadly weapon, inserted his penis into her vagina. Thus, to ascertain with moral certainty the existence of this element, every court must abide by three fundamental principles: first, while the accusation can be made with facility, it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove; second, as the crime of rape usually involves only two persons, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and third, the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[82]
	GR No. 177563 2008-10-10	PEOPLE v. DIOSDADO BALOBALO CARPIO MORALES, J.
On appellant's alibi, given AAA's positive, forthright and unwavering testimony even on cross examination and her positive identification of appellant as her rapist, such defense fails.[29]
	GR No. 179030 2008-06-12	PEOPLE v. MARCELINO RAMOS CARPIO, J.
We sustain the awards of P75,000 and P25,000 as civil indemnity and exemplary damages, respectively, for each count of rape but increase the award of moral damages from P50,000 to P75,000 for each count in line with prevailing jurisprudence.[21]
	GR No. 175275 2008-02-19	EMILIO CAMPOS v. PEOPLE YNARES-SATIAGO, J.
Thus, appellant is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, without eligibility for parole under the Indeterminate Sentence Law,[30] instead of death.
	GR No. 173790 2007-10-11	PEOPLE v. RUSSEL NAVARRO Y MARMOJADA CARPIO MORALES, J.
From the transcript of stenographic notes of the proceedings in the cases, this Court finds the testimonies of the police officer and the two MADAC operatives credible, straightforward, and corroborate each other. Appellant's denial, absent any evidence to buttress it, is, like alibi, a self-serving negative evidence which cannot be accorded greater evidentiary weight than the declaration of credible witnesses who testified on affirmative matters.[16]
	GR No. 169642 2007-09-14	PEOPLE v. ENRIQUE CEBALLOS JR. Y CABRALES CARPIO MORALES, J.
As for appellant's allegation that AAA and BBB falsely charged him as he was strict and had had quarrels with his wife CCC, the same was correctly brushed aside by the appellate court as "puerile and . . . too flimsy to merit even scant consideration." Indeed, People v. Bidoc[64] teaches: . . . [P]arental punishment or disciplinary chastisement is not enough for a daughter in a Filipino family to falsely accuse her father of rape. She would not subject herself to an examination of her private parts, undergo the trauma and humiliation of public trial, and embarrass herself with the need to narrate in detail how she was raped if she was not in fact raped. It takes depravity for a young girl to concoct a tale of defloration, which would put her own father on death row, drag herself and the rest of her family to a lifetime of shame, and make them the object of gossip among their classmates and friends.[65] (Underscoring supplied) One of appellant's letters, Exhibit "L," dated July 13, 1999, sent to CCC and children, which reads in part: . . . Nalulungkot ako sa mga pangyayari sa ating buhay. Sana matanggap niyo na ito sa sarili ninyo at mapatawad na ninyo ako sa aking kasalanang nagawa. Siguro naman alam naman niyo na hindi naman ako likas na masama. Kung nagawa ko man iyong mga bagay na iyon dala na rin ng naging kahinaan ko. Lahat naman tayo ay nagkakamali at ang nangyari sa akin ay kinamuhian ko rin ang aking sarili sapagkat hindi ko alam matagal akong nabilanggo sa bisig ng diyablo na siyang tunay na may kagagawan sa pagwasak sa buhay natin. Alam niyo lahat ng kasalanan ng nagagawa ng tao ay simbuyo ng damdamin na inutos ng diyablo na di natin napaglalabanan sapagkat wala sa puso natin si Cristo. Alam mo siguro na nangarap din ako sa buhay natin. Lahat ay ginawa ko para sa inyo naging mabuti rin akong ama. Inaamin ko na ako'y nalulong sa bawal na gamut at ito rin ang naging dahilan kaya ako nakagawa ng di ko gusto. Patawarin niyo ako kung di ko kayang aminin sa korte ang kasalanan ko . . .[66] (Emphasis supplied) in fact strongly reflects his admission of guilt to thus negate his professed innocence.
	GR No. 169642 2007-09-14	PEOPLE v. ENRIQUE CEBALLOS JR. Y CABRALES CARPIO MORALES, J.
As for appellant's allegation that AAA and BBB falsely charged him as he was strict and had had quarrels with his wife CCC, the same was correctly brushed aside by the appellate court as "puerile and . . . too flimsy to merit even scant consideration." Indeed, People v. Bidoc[64] teaches: . . . [P]arental punishment or disciplinary chastisement is not enough for a daughter in a Filipino family to falsely accuse her father of rape. She would not subject herself to an examination of her private parts, undergo the trauma and humiliation of public trial, and embarrass herself with the need to narrate in detail how she was raped if she was not in fact raped. It takes depravity for a young girl to concoct a tale of defloration, which would put her own father on death row, drag herself and the rest of her family to a lifetime of shame, and make them the object of gossip among their classmates and friends.[65] (Underscoring supplied) One of appellant's letters, Exhibit "L," dated July 13, 1999, sent to CCC and children, which reads in part: . . . Nalulungkot ako sa mga pangyayari sa ating buhay. Sana matanggap niyo na ito sa sarili ninyo at mapatawad na ninyo ako sa aking kasalanang nagawa. Siguro naman alam naman niyo na hindi naman ako likas na masama. Kung nagawa ko man iyong mga bagay na iyon dala na rin ng naging kahinaan ko. Lahat naman tayo ay nagkakamali at ang nangyari sa akin ay kinamuhian ko rin ang aking sarili sapagkat hindi ko alam matagal akong nabilanggo sa bisig ng diyablo na siyang tunay na may kagagawan sa pagwasak sa buhay natin. Alam niyo lahat ng kasalanan ng nagagawa ng tao ay simbuyo ng damdamin na inutos ng diyablo na di natin napaglalabanan sapagkat wala sa puso natin si Cristo. Alam mo siguro na nangarap din ako sa buhay natin. Lahat ay ginawa ko para sa inyo naging mabuti rin akong ama. Inaamin ko na ako'y nalulong sa bawal na gamut at ito rin ang naging dahilan kaya ako nakagawa ng di ko gusto. Patawarin niyo ako kung di ko kayang aminin sa korte ang kasalanan ko . . .[66] (Emphasis supplied) in fact strongly reflects his admission of guilt to thus negate his professed innocence.
	GR No. 169642 2007-09-14	PEOPLE v. ENRIQUE CEBALLOS JR. Y CABRALES CARPIO MORALES, J.
As for appellant's allegation that AAA and BBB falsely charged him as he was strict and had had quarrels with his wife CCC, the same was correctly brushed aside by the appellate court as "puerile and . . . too flimsy to merit even scant consideration." Indeed, People v. Bidoc[64] teaches: . . . [P]arental punishment or disciplinary chastisement is not enough for a daughter in a Filipino family to falsely accuse her father of rape. She would not subject herself to an examination of her private parts, undergo the trauma and humiliation of public trial, and embarrass herself with the need to narrate in detail how she was raped if she was not in fact raped. It takes depravity for a young girl to concoct a tale of defloration, which would put her own father on death row, drag herself and the rest of her family to a lifetime of shame, and make them the object of gossip among their classmates and friends.[65] (Underscoring supplied) One of appellant's letters, Exhibit "L," dated July 13, 1999, sent to CCC and children, which reads in part: . . . Nalulungkot ako sa mga pangyayari sa ating buhay. Sana matanggap niyo na ito sa sarili ninyo at mapatawad na ninyo ako sa aking kasalanang nagawa. Siguro naman alam naman niyo na hindi naman ako likas na masama. Kung nagawa ko man iyong mga bagay na iyon dala na rin ng naging kahinaan ko. Lahat naman tayo ay nagkakamali at ang nangyari sa akin ay kinamuhian ko rin ang aking sarili sapagkat hindi ko alam matagal akong nabilanggo sa bisig ng diyablo na siyang tunay na may kagagawan sa pagwasak sa buhay natin. Alam niyo lahat ng kasalanan ng nagagawa ng tao ay simbuyo ng damdamin na inutos ng diyablo na di natin napaglalabanan sapagkat wala sa puso natin si Cristo. Alam mo siguro na nangarap din ako sa buhay natin. Lahat ay ginawa ko para sa inyo naging mabuti rin akong ama. Inaamin ko na ako'y nalulong sa bawal na gamut at ito rin ang naging dahilan kaya ako nakagawa ng di ko gusto. Patawarin niyo ako kung di ko kayang aminin sa korte ang kasalanan ko . . .[66] (Emphasis supplied) in fact strongly reflects his admission of guilt to thus negate his professed innocence.
	GR No. 169642 2007-09-14	PEOPLE v. ENRIQUE CEBALLOS JR. Y CABRALES CARPIO MORALES, J.
As for appellant's allegation that AAA and BBB falsely charged him as he was strict and had had quarrels with his wife CCC, the same was correctly brushed aside by the appellate court as "puerile and . . . too flimsy to merit even scant consideration." Indeed, People v. Bidoc[64] teaches: . . . [P]arental punishment or disciplinary chastisement is not enough for a daughter in a Filipino family to falsely accuse her father of rape. She would not subject herself to an examination of her private parts, undergo the trauma and humiliation of public trial, and embarrass herself with the need to narrate in detail how she was raped if she was not in fact raped. It takes depravity for a young girl to concoct a tale of defloration, which would put her own father on death row, drag herself and the rest of her family to a lifetime of shame, and make them the object of gossip among their classmates and friends.[65] (Underscoring supplied) One of appellant's letters, Exhibit "L," dated July 13, 1999, sent to CCC and children, which reads in part: . . . Nalulungkot ako sa mga pangyayari sa ating buhay. Sana matanggap niyo na ito sa sarili ninyo at mapatawad na ninyo ako sa aking kasalanang nagawa. Siguro naman alam naman niyo na hindi naman ako likas na masama. Kung nagawa ko man iyong mga bagay na iyon dala na rin ng naging kahinaan ko. Lahat naman tayo ay nagkakamali at ang nangyari sa akin ay kinamuhian ko rin ang aking sarili sapagkat hindi ko alam matagal akong nabilanggo sa bisig ng diyablo na siyang tunay na may kagagawan sa pagwasak sa buhay natin. Alam niyo lahat ng kasalanan ng nagagawa ng tao ay simbuyo ng damdamin na inutos ng diyablo na di natin napaglalabanan sapagkat wala sa puso natin si Cristo. Alam mo siguro na nangarap din ako sa buhay natin. Lahat ay ginawa ko para sa inyo naging mabuti rin akong ama. Inaamin ko na ako'y nalulong sa bawal na gamut at ito rin ang naging dahilan kaya ako nakagawa ng di ko gusto. Patawarin niyo ako kung di ko kayang aminin sa korte ang kasalanan ko . . .[66] (Emphasis supplied) in fact strongly reflects his admission of guilt to thus negate his professed innocence.
	GR No. 172875 2007-08-15	PEOPLE v. DANIEL PEREZ Y BACANI CARPIO MORALES, J.
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 that degree of proof that, to an unprejudiced mind, produces conviction. Second, unless there are special reasons, the findings of trial courts, especially regarding the credibility of witnesses, are entitled to great respect and will not be disturbed on appeal. Third, the disposition of rape cases are governed by the following guidelines: (1) an accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution, and (3) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot draw strength from the weakness of the evidence of his defense.[37] (Italics in the original, emphasis and underscoring supplied)
	GR NO. 171163 2007-07-04	PEOPLE v. MELITON JALBUENA Y TADIOSA CARPIO MORALES, J.
x x x In previous cases, this Court held that parental punishment or disciplinary chastisement is not enough for a daughter in a Filipino family to falsely accuse her father of rape. She would not subject herself to an examination of her private parts, undergo the trauma and humiliation of public trial, and embarrass herself with the need to narrate in detail how she was raped if she was not in fact raped. It takes depravity for a young girl to concoct a tale of defloration, which would put her own father on death row, drag herself and the rest of her family to a lifetime of shame, and make them the object of gossip among their classmates and friends.[31] (Underscoring supplied)
	GR NO. 168174 2007-04-13	PEOPLE v. FRANCISCO REYES Y ABREMATEA QUISUMBING, J.
(2) the award of exemplary damages is reduced, from P75,000 to P25,000, consistent with prevailing jurisprudence,[19] but moral damages should also be awarded in the amount of P75,000.[20] No pronouncement as to costs.