View full case

PEOPLE v. ALVIN ABULON Y SALVANIA

FACTS:

The appellant, Alvin Abulon, was charged with three counts of qualified rape and one count of acts of lasciviousness against his minor daughter AAA. AAA testified that the appellant raped her on three separate occasions in March 1999. The first incident occurred when appellant came home drunk and threatened AAA with a knife, forcing her to have sexual intercourse with him. The second incident happened the following evening when appellant again forced himself on AAA while her siblings watched. The third incident occurred the following morning when appellant kissed and fondled AAA’s vagina. AAA’s mother, BBB, testified that she was working in Las Piñas during the time of the incidents, but learned about them from her son CCC. CCC also testified that he witnessed his father lying naked on top of AAA on three occasions. The prosecution presented other witnesses, including a police officer and a doctor, who corroborated AAA’s testimony.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Santa Cruz, Laguna found the appellant guilty of qualified rape and acts of lasciviousness. Abulon was sentenced to death for the rape charges and a six-month to six-year imprisonment for acts of lasciviousness. The case was appealed to the Court of Appeals, which affirmed the conviction with modifications to the damages awarded. Abulon further appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, arguing that the trial court erred in giving weight to the testimony of the victim and alleging bias in the questioning of the victim. The Court of Appeals, however, upheld the trial court's decision, finding the victim's testimony credible and sufficient to sustain a conviction.

In her testimony, the victim recounted the rape incidents in detail. She stated that her father came home drunk after attending a wedding celebration and entered their room where she and her siblings were sleeping. The victim woke up when she felt her father on top of her and noticed that he was naked while she still had her sando on but no panty. The victim asserted that her father threatened to kill them with a knife if they reported him and poked the knife at her and her siblings. She experienced pain in her private part and observed a whitish substance coming out, which she attributed to her father's private part. The victim confirmed that her father's penis entered her vagina and described his movements as an upward and downward stroke. The victim also mentioned that her father kissed her on her mouth, private part, and breasts. Another incident of rape occurred on March 15, 1999, while they were all sleeping in their house at around 10:30 in the evening.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether or not the accused father is guilty of rape in Criminal Case No. SC-7422.

  2. Whether or not the accused father is guilty of rape in Criminal Case No. SC-7423.

  3. Whether or not the accused father is guilty of attempted rape in Criminal Case No. SC-7424.

  4. Whether the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses can prevail over the defenses of denial and alibi.

  5. Whether the delay in reporting the incidents of rape by the victim affected her credibility.

  6. Whether the trial judge exhibited bias by propounding leading questions to the victim.

  7. Whether the Informations filed against the appellant were defective.

  8. Whether the appellant can be found guilty of rape by sexual assault when the charge in the Information is rape through carnal knowledge.

  9. Whether the appellant can be found guilty of rape by sexual assault despite a variance between the offense charged and the offense proved.

  10. Whether the appellant can be convicted of acts of lasciviousness instead of rape by sexual assault under the variance doctrine.

RULING:

  1. The accused father is guilty of rape in Criminal Case No. SC-7422. The victim's testimony, which was clear, consistent, and corroborated by other evidence, sufficiently established the elements of rape.

  2. The accused father is guilty of rape in Criminal Case No. SC-7423. The victim's testimony, backed by other evidence, proved that the accused had sexual intercourse with her against her will on two separate occasions.

  3. The accused father is not guilty of attempted rape in Criminal Case No. SC-7424. The victim's testimony does not support the charge of attempted rape as there was no evidence to indicate that the accused attempted to have sexual intercourse with her.

  4. The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were given more weight than the defenses of denial and alibi. Alibi and denial are weak defenses that cannot prevail over the positive and categorical testimony and identification of the complainant. Appellant failed to provide credible corroboration for his alibi, and he did not establish that it was physically impossible for him to be present at the scene of the crime. The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were convincing and supported by evidence.

  5. The delay in reporting the incidents of rape did not affect the credibility of the victim. A child of thirteen years cannot be expected to know how to report the crime to the authorities. The victim's silence in not immediately reporting the incidents is sufficiently explained by the threats from the appellant and the lack of support and disbelief from trusted relatives. The charge of rape is rendered doubtful only if the delay is unreasonable and unexplained.

  6. The trial judge did not exhibit bias by propounding leading questions to the victim. It is within the judge's prerogative to ask clarificatory questions to uncover the truth. The judge's questions were clarificatory in nature and did not prejudice the accused. Allegations of bias on the part of the trial court should be received with caution.

  7. The Informations filed against the appellant were not defective. Even if the words "force and/or intimidation" were not specifically alleged, force or intimidation need not be proven in incestuous cases. The overpowering moral influence of a father over his daughter takes the place of violence and offer of resistance ordinarily required in rape cases where the accused is unrelated to the victim.

  8. No, the appellant cannot be found guilty of rape by sexual assault. The charge in the Information is rape through carnal knowledge, and the appellant was found guilty of acts of lasciviousness only.

  9. The appellant can be found guilty of rape by sexual assault although there is a variance between the offense charged and the offense proved. This is in accordance with the variance doctrine embodied in Section 4, in relation to Section 5, Rule 120, Rules of Criminal Procedure. Under these provisions, when there is a variance between the offense charged and the offense proved, the accused shall be convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense charged or of the offense charged which is included in the offense proved.

  10. The appellant can be convicted of the lesser crime of acts of lasciviousness under the variance doctrine. Acts of lasciviousness are necessarily included in rape, and thus, the appellant can be convicted of acts of lasciviousness even if he was initially charged with rape by sexual assault.

PRINCIPLES:

  • A victim's testimony, if clear, consistent, and corroborated by other evidence, is sufficient to establish the elements of rape.

  • It is inconceivable and contrary to human experience for a daughter to accuse her own father of rape unless he is the one who actually committed the crime.

  • Alibi and denial are weak defenses that cannot prevail over the positive and categorical testimony and identification of the complainant.

  • Alibi must be supported by credible corroboration from disinterested witnesses to be considered.

  • Delay in reporting a rape does not diminish the credibility of the victim if the delay is reasonable and explained.

  • The judge can ask clarificatory questions to uncover the truth and expedite proceedings.

  • Allegations of bias on the part of the trial court should be received with caution and require the accused to prove prejudice.

  • Incestuous cases do not require the proof of force or intimidation, as the overpowering moral influence of a father over his daughter takes the place of violence and resistance.

  • Republic Act No. 8353, the Anti-Rape Law of 1997, recognizes rape by sexual assault as a separate mode of committing rape, which includes the insertion of the penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice, and the insertion of any instrument or object into the genital or anal orifice of another person.

  • Rape through sexual intercourse is denominated as "organ rape" or "penile rape", while rape by sexual assault is denominated as "instrument or object rape", "gender-free rape", or "homosexual rape".

  • The differences between the two modes of committing rape include the offender (only a man in the first mode, both man or woman in the second), the offended party (only a woman in the first mode, both man or woman in the second), the act of penetration (penile penetration of the vagina in the first mode, insertion of the penis or any instrument/object in the second), and the penalty (higher in the first mode than in the second).

  • The first mode of rape is not necessarily included in the second, and vice-versa.

  • Variance doctrine: When there is a variance between the offense charged and the offense proved, the accused shall be convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense charged or of the offense charged which is included in the offense proved.

  • Acts of lasciviousness are necessarily included in the crime of rape.