7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

ENBANC

[G.R.Nos.13292324.June6,2002]

PEOPLEOFTHEPHILIPPINES,appellee,vs.MARCELOMENDOZA,appellant.
DECISION
PANGANIBAN,J.:

Theaccusedmaynotbeheldliableforanoffensegraverthanthatforwhichheorshewasindicted.Having
been charged with simple rape only, herein appellant cannot be convicted of qualified rape. Hence, the death
penaltyimposedbythetrialcourtshouldbereducedtoreclusionperpetua.
TheCase
ForautomaticreviewbythisCourtistheDecision[1]datedFebruary10,1998,issuedbytheRegionalTrial
Court (RTC) of Tagaytay City (Branch 18), finding Marcelo Mendoza guilty of two counts of rape, each
qualifiedbytheuseofadeadlyweapon.ThedecretalportionoftheDecisionreadsasfollows:
WHEREFORE,theCourtherebyfindstheaccusedMarceloMendozaGUILTYbeyondreasonabledoubtin
bothcriminalcasesanddoherebysentenceshim
InCriminalCaseNo.TG259796,tosuffertheextremepenaltyofDEATHandtoindemnifythevictim
MichelleTolentinothesumofP30,000.00asactualdamages
InCriminalCaseNo.TG259896,tosuffertheextremepenaltyofDEATHandtoindemnifythevictimthesum
ofP30,000.00asactualdamages.
SOORDERED.[2]
TwoInformations[3]againstappellant,filedonMay31,1996,chargedhimasfollows:
CRIM.CASENO.TG259796
Thatonoraboutthe25thdayofJune1995,atBarangayTubuan,MunicipalityofSilang,ProvinceofCavite,
PhilippinesandwithinthejurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamedaccused,withlewddesigns,by
meansofforce,violenceandintimidation,andtakingadvantageofhissuperiorstrength,did,thenandthere,
wilfully,unlawfullyandfeloniously,havecarnalknowledgeofoneMichelleG.Tolentinoagainstherwilland
consent,toherdamageandprejudice.[4]
CRIM.CASENO.TG259896
Thatonoraboutthe11thdayofAugust1995atBarangayTubuan,MunicipalityofSilang,ProvinceofCavite,
PhilippinesandwithinthejurisdictionofthisHonorableCourt,theabovenamedaccused,withlewddesigns,by
meansofforce,violenceandintimidationandtakingadvantageofhissuperiorstrengthoverthepersonof
MichelleG.Tolentinowhoisonlythirteen(13)yearsold,did,thenandthere,wilfully,unlawfullyand
feloniously,havecarnalknowledgeofsaidMichelleG.Tolentino,againstherwiltandconsent,toherdamage
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

1/11

7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

andprejudice.[5]
WhenarraignedonJune18,1996,appellant,assistedbyhiscounsel,[6]pleadednotguilty.[7]Induecourse,
theformerwastriedandconvictedoftwocountsofqualifiedrape.
TheFacts
VersionoftheProsecution
TheOfficeoftheSolicitorGeneral(OSG)summarizestheevidencefortheprosecutioninthiswise:[8]
OnJune25,1995,privatecomplainantMichelleTolentino,then13yearsold,togetherwithheraunt,wenttothe
rivertowashclothesatabout7:00inthemorning.Theyfinisheddoingthelaundryatabout2:00inthe
afternoon.Michelleproceededtogoaheadwithsomeofthelaundry.Sheleftherauntintheriverwhile
Michellestartedtocartsomeoftheclotheshome.
Michellethenwentonherway,passingthroughthecoffeeplantationofBenSalazar.Whensheapproacheda
curveontheroad,shesawappellantMarceloMendozastandingthere,watchingher.Withoutmuchado,
appellantpulledher,goingintothethickestpartoftheplantation.Shestruggledandpleadedwithhim,butthe
moreshestruggled,themorehepersisted,untilhefinallyhurtherbypressingherwristsohard.Thetwo
reachedaclearing,severalmetersawayfromtheroad.
Atthetime,MichellewaswearingshortsandTshirt.Appellantforcefullydivestedherofhershortsandpanty
somuchsothatthemiddleportionofhershorts(pundilyo)gottornandthegarterofherpantygotdamaged.
Appellantwasabletopinherdownasheproceededtotakeoffhislowergarments.Allthetime,appellant
threatenedherwithabolothathewasthencarrying.Thebolo,however,wasplacedasidewhenappellant
proceededtorapeMichellebyinsertinghissexorganintohervagina.AndthoughMichelleholleredforhelp,
nobodycametosuccorherbecausetheplacewasfarandisolated.Afterhewasthrough,appellantwarnedher
againsttellinganyoneaboutherordeal.
TheincidentwasrepeatedxxxonAugust11,1995.Justlikebefore,therapeoccurredinsideBenSalazars
coffeeplantation.Asbefore,appellantintimidatedandthreatenedMichellewiththeuseofhisbolo.
Fearfulthatappellantmightrepeattheincident,Michelletoldhermotherabouttherapes,sometimein
December1995.Shegavehercomplaintstatementonthesamedayandwasreferredtothedoctorformedical
examination.
Dr.GarciadelaCruztestifiedthatshewastheonewhoexaminedMichelleTolentino.Perherexamination,she
opinedthatMichellemusthavebeenrapedbecausetherewasresistanceonhervaginalcanal,whichupon
internalexaminationadmitstwo(2)fingers,anindicationthatshehadsexualintercourse.(Citationsomitted)
VersionoftheDefense
Ontheotherhand,thePublicAttorneysOfficenarratestheevidenceforthedefenseasfollows:[9]
MariaGumbantestifiedthatsheisapreacherintheJesusMiracleCrusade(JMC)andaccusedMarcelo
Mendozaistheirmember.
SherecallsthatonJune25,1995,theyhadtheLastHolySupperServiceheldatRodriguezSportsComplexin
Marikina,MetroManilafrom8:00oclockinthemorningto9:00oclockintheevening.Togetherwiththe
accused,theywere24personswhowenttotheplaceridingatensitterpassengerjeep.Shecouldnotmissthe
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

2/11

7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

accusedinasmuchasheplayedtheguitarandsung,too.Hisnameappearedinthelistofmemberswhoattended
theceremony.Afterthecelebration,theywenthome.Accusedandwifestayedintheirhome.Theypracticed
singingandplayingguitarallthroughthewholenightuptothenextmorning,withoutsleeping.
ShealsotestifiedthateveryFridaytheCrusadealsohasaceremonycalledovernightwhichstarts5:00oclockin
theafternoonupto8:00oclockofthefollowingmorning.August11,1995wasaFriday.Theyholdthe
overnightceremonyattheMarikinaSportsComplex.Accusedattendedtheceremony,hisnamewasincludedin
thelistofattendance.
JoelGarciatestifiedthatcomplainantMichelleTolentinoishissisterinlaw,hersisterishiswifeRosalie.
August11,1995,wasthebirthdayofhiswife.ComplainantandherparentscametotheirhouseatLalaanSt.,
SilangCaviteinthemorningofsaiddateandleftatabout6:00oclockintheevening.
HealsotestifiedthathecametoknowoftheaccusationsagainsttheaccusedintheeveningofDecember11,
1995.Heandhiswifetransferredtothehouseofhisparentsinlawwhenhiswifewasabouttodelivertheir
baby.
Insaidevening,heheardhisparentsinlaw,thecomplainant,BernardoGarcia,andacertainChitothatMichelle
stoleP3,000.00fromEmmaMendozaandherfatherhurther.BernardoGarciaproddedhisparentsinlawtofile
acaseofrapeagainsttheaccusedsothataccusedwouldpaythemoneyallegedlystolenbythecomplainant
inasmuchasaccusedwasgivingmoneytothelatter.Complainantdidnotwanttobuytheideabutherfathergot
madatherandthreatenedher.
AccusedMarceloMendozatestifiedthatonJune25,1995,hewasattheSportsCenterinMarikinaattending
mass.HelefthishouseatTubuanSilangCaviteat8:00to9:00oclockinthemorning.
HealsotestifiedthatonAugust11,1995,heleftthehouseearlyinthemorningtomeetabuyeratAdamson
University.Hewashome5:00oclockintheafternoonofthesameday.Uponarrival,hesawhiscolleaguesin
theirreligiousorganizationandtogethertheywenttoMarikinatoattendthereligiousserviceatthesportscenter
andstayedthereovernight.
HealsotestifiedthatheknowsMichelleTolentino,herneighbor.Hecouldnotunderstandwhyhewascharged
withrape,asherparentsarelikehisbrotherandsisterandtheyhaveagoodrelationship.
Oncrossexamination,hetestifiedthattheparentsofthecomplainantwereextortingmoneyfromhimbecause
theylearned,thatasagent,hewasabletoobtainacommissionfromsellingland.Itwashissisterwhorelayedto
himthattheparentsofthecomplainantwasaskinghim1.5millionpesos.(Citationsomitted)
RulingoftheTrialCourt
The court a quo believed the testimony of complainant, because it was straightforward, convincing and
credible.TheRTCfurtherfoundthathewasarmedwithaboloxxxwhichheusedtocauseprivatecomplainant
MichelleTolentinotosubmittohiscarnaldesiresonJune25,1995andAugust11,1995.Hence,itconvicted
himofrapequalifiedbytheuseofadeadlyweapon.
Hence,thisautomaticreview.[10]
AssignmentofErrors
InhisBrief,appellantfaultsthecourtaquowiththefollowingallegederrors:[11]
I
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

3/11

7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

Thetrialcourterredinimposingtheextremepenaltyofdeath[on]theaccusedappellantdespitethechargesof
simplerapesagainsthimintheInformations.
II

ThetrialcourterredingivingweightandcredencetothetestimonyofComplainantMichelleTolentinothat
accusedappellantrapedheronJune25,1995,August11,1995andeighttimesbetweenthosedatesdespiteits
beingnot[sic]unconvincing,improbableandincredible.
TheCourtsRuling
Theappealispartlymeritorious.
FirstIssue:
QualifyingCircumstanceofDeadlyWeapon
BothInformationsinthepresentcasechargedappellantwithsimplerapewhich,underArticle335ofthe
Revised Penal Code, is punishable with reclusion perpetua. Neither one of these alleged that the rapes were
committedwiththeuseofadeadlyweapon.
InPeoplev.DelaCuesta,[12]weexplainedthus:
Itwouldbeadenialoftherightoftheaccusedtobeinformedofthechargesagainsthim,andconsequently,a
denialofdueprocess,ifheischargedwithsimplerape,onwhichhewasarraigned,andbeconvictedof
qualifiedrapepunishablebydeath.[13]
AggravatingandqualifyingcircumstancesmustbecategoricallyallegedintheInformation[14]otherwise,
theycannotbeappreciated.
Inthiscase,ascontendedbyboththedefensecounselandtheOSG,appellantcannotbeconvictedofrape
qualifiedbytheuseofadeadlyweapon,sincethatcircumstancewasnotallegedintheInformations.Hecannot
bepunishedforanoffensegraverthanthatforwhichhewascharged.[15]
Moreover, the records and Michelles own categorical statement under questioning indicate that appellant
hadmerelykeptthebolobyhissideandhelditonlywhenheundressedhimself[16]naturally,sothathecould
removeitfromhisbody.
Thecrimeofrapeisnotqualifiedbytheuseofadeadlyweaponwhere,evenastheaccusedcarriedaboloinhis
waist,asheusuallydid,heneverusedthesametothreatenthevictim.[17]
WhatcanqualifytheoffenseunderRepublicAct7659soastowarranttheimpositionofthedeathpenalty
wouldbewhentherapeiscommittedwiththeuseofadeadlyweaponandnotjusttheovertactofbeingarmed
withaweapon.[18]
We also affirm the positions of both appellant and the OSG that the aggravating circumstance of
uninhabitedplacecannotbeappreciatedtoincreasetodeaththepenaltyofreclusionperpetuawhichisasingle
indivisiblepenalty.[19]
SecondIssue:
CredibilityofProsecutionWitnesses
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

4/11

7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

Itiswellentrenchedinthisjurisdictionthatthefindingsofthetrialcourtonthecredibilityofwitnessesand
their testimonies are entitled to the highest respect and will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of any
clear showing that it overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied some facts or circumstances of weight and
substancethatwouldhaveaffectedtheresultofthecase.Havingseenandheardthewitnessesthemselvesand
observedtheirbehaviorandmanneroftestifying,itwasinabetterpositiontodecidethequestionofcredibility.
[20]

Inthiscase,wefindnoreasontodisturbthefindingoftheRTCastothecredibilityofprivatecomplainant.
MichellenarratedhowshewasrapedonJune25,1995,asfollows:
QAndonJune25,1995,doyourecalliftherewasanyunusualincidentbetweenyouandMarceloMendoza?

xxxxxxxxx
WITNESS:
Yes,sir.
FISCALVELAZCO:
WhatwasthatunusualincidentthatoccurredbetweenyouandMarceloMendoza?
AHerapedme,sir.
QWillyoutelltheHonorableCourthowtheaccusedrapedyou?
AYes,sir.Heheldmyhandsandthenheundressedme,sir.

xxxxxxxxx
FISCALVELAZCO:
Andafteryouwereundressedbytheaccused,whathappened?
WITNESS:
Herapedme,sir.
FISCALVELAZCO:
Andwhatdoyoumeanbyherapedyou?
AHeforcedme,sir.Hereallyrapedme.Iwasalreadypleadingtohim.
FISCALVELAZCO:
Andwhenyousaidtheaccusedrapedyou,exactly,whatdidhedotoyou?
AHeinsertedhispenisintomyvagina,sir.
QAndhowdidyoufeel?
AIfeltpain,sir? [21]

Shefurtherstated:
COURT:
QuestionbytheCourt.Accordingtoyou,theaccusedonJune25,1995heldyourhandandundressedyou,and
despiteyourpleas,herapedyou.Wouldyoudescribehowyouweredressedatthattime?
AIwaswearingatshirtandshorts,yourHonor.
COURT:
Youmeantosaythatyouhaveashirtoveratshirt?Wereyouwearingabraatthattime?
AYes,yourHonor.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

5/11

7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

COURT:
Whataboutpanty?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Whenyousaidheundressesyou,whatclothesdidheremovefromyourbody?
ATheshortandpanty,yourHonor.
COURT:
Whataboutyourtshirt?
ANo,yourHonor.
COURT:
So,whenheremovedyourshorts,didheuseforceindoingthat?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Wastheshortstorn?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Whatpartoftheshortswastornbecauseofthestruggle?
AThemiddleportion(pundiyo).
COURT:
Whatistherelativepositionoftheaccusedtoyouwhenheremovedtheshort?Washestandingup?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Whataboutyou?
AHewastryingtolaymedown,yourHonor.
COURT:
Washeabletosuccessfullylaidyoudown,forcedyoudown?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Whenhewasabletoremoved[sic]theshorts,wereyoustillstandingup,orwereyoulyingdownalready?
AIwaslyingdown,yourHonor.
COURT:
Where?
AOntheground,yourHonor.
COURT:
Afterremovingyourshorts,whatelsedidhedo?
AHerapedme,yourHonor.
COURT:
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

6/11

7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

Didhealsoremoveyourpanty?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Didhealsouseforceinremovingyourpanty?
AYes,youHonor.
COURT:
Wasyourpantytornordamagedbecauseoftheforcethatwasemployedbytheaccusedinremovingyourpanty?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Whatwereyoudoingwhentheaccusedwastryingtoremoveyourshorts?
AIwascrying,yourHonor.
COURT:
Didyounotputupastruggle?
AHehasabolo,yourHonor.
COURT:
Whatwashedoingwiththebolo?
AThebolowasonhissidewhileIwasbeingraped,yourHonor.
COURT:
Didheattempttousetheboloagainstyou?
ANo,yourHonor.
COURT:
Didhethreatenyouwiththebolo?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Washeholdingthebolowhenheremovedyourshorts?
ANo,yourHonor,onlyonhisside.
COURT:
Didyounotshoutwhentheaccusedwasalreadyintheactofremovingyourshorts?
AThereisnohousethere,yourHonor.Iwasshouting,screaming,butnobodyheardme.
COURT:
Whataboutyourauntwhowas,accordingtoyou,withyouwhenyouwerewashingorlaunderingintheriver?
Wherewasshe?
AIleftherintheriverbecauseIwasbringingupthelaunderedclothes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Youmeantosaythatdespite,whattoneofvoicedidyouuseinshouting?Wasisreallyinaloudvoice?
AItwasreallyloud.
COURT:
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

7/11

7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

Andyousaidthatyourauntwasintheriver?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Inshouting,istherenopossibilityforyouraunttohearyou?
ANone,yourHonor.
COURT:
Why?
ABecausetheriverisfar,yourHonor.
COURT:
Whataboutthepanty,wasthepantytornalso?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Onwhatpartofthepantywastorn?
AOnthegarter,yourHonor.
COURT:
Allright.Whatabouttheaccused,whenyouwerealreadyundressed,didheundresshimself?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Howdidheundresshimself?
AHewasstandingup,thenhekneeleddowntoremovetheshorts,yourHonor.
COURT:
Youmeantosaythatyouwerelyingdownandtheaccusedwasstandingupwhilehewastryingtoremoveyour
shorts?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Whataboutwhenheremovedyourpanty?
AHewasstaringatme,andthenheundressedhimself.
COURT:
Whenyousaidheundressedhimself,didhetotallyremovehisclothing?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Youmeantosaythatwhentheaccusedrapedyou,theaccusedwastotallynaked?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Whenyouwererapedforthefirsttime,didyouresisttheadvancesoftheaccusedinthiscase?
AIresisted,yourHonor.
COURT:
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

8/11

7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

Yousaidthatyoustruggledandstrucktheaccused?
AIwashittinghimonthearms,yourHonor.
COURT:
Withwhatdidyouhithim?
AWithmyhand,yourHonor.
COURT:
Didyounottrytoscratchtheaccused?
AIdonothavefingernails,yourHonor.
COURT
Wastheaccusedsuccessfulinrapingyou?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Youmeanhewasabletoinserthispenis?
AYes,yourHonor.
COURT:
Yousaidthatyouwererapedeight(8)times.Howmanytimesdidtheaccusedtrytohavesexualintercourse
withyouonJune25,1995?
AOnce,yourHonor.[22]

The rape is not negated by the absence of testimony stating that Michelle bled as a result of the carnal
knowledge,orthatsherewashedtheclothesthatshedroppedinthestruggle.Heractoffinishingherlaundry
choresaftertheincidentdidnotdestroyhercredibilityeither.
Itisnotuncommonforayounggirltoconcealforsometimeanassaultonhervirtuebecauseoftherapists
threat to her life.[23] There is no uniform behavior that can be expected from those who have undergone
harrowing experiences. Because different people cope differently, it is not unusual for someone abused to act
normallyinordertohideforthemeantimewhathappenedtoher,whileinternallytryingtosortoutandcope
withtheexperience.
Rapeiscommittedwhenamanhascarnalknowledgeofavictimwiththeuseofforceandintimidation.[24]
Inthiscase,Michelleidentifiedappellantasthepersonwhohadrapedher.Shealsocrediblynarratedthedetails
ofhowhehadforcedhertohavesexwithhim.Eventhephysiciansfindingscorroboratedherclaim.
Itisanacceptedprinciplethatwhenthevictimstestimonyiscorroboratedbythephysiciansfindingsof
penetration,thereissufficientfoundationtoconcludetheexistenceoftheessentialrequisiteorcarnal
knowledge.[25]
HertestimonyclearlyestablishestheelementsofsimplerapecommittedbyappellantonJune25,1995.
Ontheotherhand,theallegedrapeincidentonAugust11,1995wasnotestablishedbysufficientevidence.
Proof of carnal knowledge with the use of force, violence or intimidation was not clear. In her testimony,
MichellemerelystatedthatappellanthadrapedheronAugust11,1995,withoutgoingintodetailsorexplaining
exactly what he had done to her. Whether or not he raped her is the fact in issue which the court must
determine[26] basedontheevidenceoffered.Testimonytothateffectisnotevidence,butsimplyaconclusion,
theproofofwhichistheverypurposeofthetrial.[I]tisnotcompetentforawitness[inthiscaseMichelle]to
expressanopinion,conclusionorjudgementthereon.[27]
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

9/11

7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

Theguidingprinciplesinreviewingrapecasesare:(1)anaccusationforrapecanbemadewithfacility
though it may be difficult for the accuser to prove, it is even more difficult for the person accused, though
innocent, to disprove (2) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape, in which only two persons are
usuallyinvolved,thetestimonyofthecomplainantisscrutinizedwithextremecautionand(3)theevidencefor
theprosecutionstandsorfallsonitsownstrengthandcannotbeallowedtodrawstrengthfromtheweaknessof
thatforthedefense.[28]
FortheallegedrapeonAugust12,1995,wehavescrutinizedtheevidencepresentedbytheprosecution,but
itfailstoestablishbeyondreasonabledoubttheelementsofcarnalknowledgeandforceorintimidation.Hence,
wecannotsustainappellantsrapeconvictioninthiscase.
The unpardonable assault on the child is tragic and the trial court may have been swayed by the tide of
humanindignation,[buttheSupremeCourtmust]upholdtheprimacyofthepresumptionofinnocenceinfavor
oftheaccusedwhentheevidenceathandfallsshortofthequantumrequiredtosupportconviction.[29]
CivilIndemnity
The court a quo also erred in its civil award. Consistent with prevailing jurisprudence, we hold that
complainantisentitledtoP50,000asindemnityexdelictoandanotherP50,000asmoraldamages.[30]Westrike
out the award of P30,000 as actual damages because, as correctly pointed out by the Office of the Solicitor
General,noproofwasadducedbycomplainanttosubstantiateit.[31] InPeoplev.Catubig,[32] wevalidatedthe
award of moral damages to rape victims in the amount of P50,000 and explained that it rests on the jural
foundationthatthecrimeofrapenecessarilybringswithitshame,mentalanguish,besmirchedreputation,moral
shockandsocialhumiliationtotheoffendedparty.ThevictimalsodeservestoreceivetheamountofP50,000
[as]civilindemnity,theequivalentofcompensatorydamages.[33]
WHEREFORE, the appeal is PARTLY GRANTED and the appealed Decision MODIFIED. Appellant
Marcelo Mendoza is CONVICTED of simple rape in Criminal Case No. TG259796 and is sentenced to
reclusion perpetua. He is further ordered to pay complainant P50,000 as indemnity ex delicto and another
P50,000asmoraldamages.InCriminalCaseNo.259896,AppellantMarceloMendozaisACQUITTED,since
theelementsofrapewerenotproven.Nopronouncementastocosts.
SOORDERED.
Bellosillo, Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Quisumbing, de Leon, Jr., SandovalGutierrez, Carpio, Austria
Martinez,andCorona,JJ.,concur.
Davide,Jr.,C.J.,abroad,onofficialleave.
PunoandYnaresSantiago,JJ.,abroad,onofficialbusiness.
[1]PennedbyPresidingJudgeAlfonsoS.Garcia.
[2]AssailedDecision,p.17rollo,p.32records,p.82.
[3]SignedbyAssistantProvincialProsecutorTitoS.Carpina.
[4]Rollo,p.4records,p.1.
[5]Records,p.10.
[6]Atty.CrisostomoDarioJr.
[7]OrderdatedJune18,1996records,p.29.
[8]AppelleesBrief,pp.24rollo,pp.102104.TheBriefwassignedbySolicitorGeneralRicardoP.Galvez,Asst.SolicitorGeneral
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

10/11

7/22/2016

PeoplevsMendoza:13292324:June6,2002:J.Panganiban:EnBanc

RomanG.delRosarioandSolicitorMa.TheresaG.SanJuan.
[9]AppellantsBrief,pp.57rollo,p.6567.AppellantsBriefwassignedbyAtty.ArceliA.Rubin,Atty.TeresitaS.deGuzmanand
Atty.LiwaywayJ.Nazal,allofthePublicAttorneysOffice.
[10]ThiscasewasdeemedsubmittedforresolutiononSeptember13,2000,uponreceiptbythisCourtofappellantsReplyBrief.
[11]Page1,AppellantsBriefrollo,p.61.
[12]304SCRA83,92,March2,1999.
[13]Ibid.,p.92,perPardo,J.
[14]Section9,Rule110.
[15]SeePeoplev.Perez,296SCRA17,September24,1998Peoplev.Joya,227SCRA9,October1,1993Peoplev.Narido,316
SCRA131,October1,1999.
[16]TSN,September9,1996,p.11.
[17]Peoplev.Onabia,306SCRA23,April20,1999,perBuena,J.
[18]Peoplev.Sagaysay,308SCRA455,465,June17,1999,perVitug,J.
[19]Article 63 of The Revised Penal Code provides: ART 63. Rulesfortheapplicationofindivisiblepenalties. In all cases in
whichthelawprescribesasingleindivisiblepenalty,itshallbeappliedbythecourtsregardlessofanymitigatingoraggravating
circumstancesthatmayhaveattendedthecommissionofthedeed.
xxxxxxxxx.
[20]Peoplev.Plana,GRNo.128285,November27,2001Peoplev.DeGuzman,333SCRA269,June8,2000.
[21]TSN,August26,1996,pp.57.
[22]Ibid.,pp.1825.
[23]Peoplev.Manahan,315SCRA476,September29,1999.
[24]Peoplev.Gastador,305SCRA659,April14,1999.
[25]Peoplev.Rosales,313SCRA757,763,September8,1999,perBellosillo,J.,citingPeoplev.Castillo,197SCRA657,May29,
1991.
[26]Francisco,Evidence,1996ed.,p.348.
[27]Ibid.p.349,citingCityofManilav.Rodriguez,7Phil.292,January3,1907Ortizv.CompaniaMaritima,7Phil.507,February
21,1907Rocha&Co.v.SteamshipMuncasterCastle,17Phil.543,December20,1910.
[28]Peoplev.Mahinay,302SCRA455,February1,1999Peoplev.Manggasin,306SCRA228,April21,1999Peoplev.Bea Jr.
306SCRA653,May5,1999.
[29]Peoplev.Bravo,318SCRA812,825,November22,1999,perGonzagaReyes,J.
[30]Peoplev.Reyes,311SCRA408,July28,1999.
[31]Peoplev.DelaTongga,ORNo.133246,July31,2000Peoplev.Narido,316SCRA131,October1,1999.
[32]ORNo.137842,August23,2001,perVitug,J,citingPeoplev.Nuez,310SCRA168,July8,1999andPeoplev.Narido,supra.
[33]Ibid.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2002/jun2002/132923_24.htm

11/11