FACTS:

The case involves the conviction of accused-appellant Catalino Mingming y Discalso for three counts of statutory rape. The accused was convicted by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Caloocan City and was imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count. The Informations under which he was prosecuted stated that he sexually abused and had sexual intercourse with a 10-year-old girl. The incidents occurred in May 1998 and June 1998 in Caloocan City. The victim reported the incidents to her caretakers after the second incident, leading to the police investigation and medical examination. The examination revealed signs of sexual abuse. The accused denied the charges and claimed that they were filed against him because he refused to lend money to the victim's caretakers. The RTC rejected his defenses and found him guilty, which was affirmed by the Court of Appeals with a modification on the award of damages.

The accused, Catalino Mingming, was found guilty by the court a quo for three counts of statutory rape. The trial court sentenced him to suffer three consecutive reclusion perpetua terms and ordered him to pay the victim, AAA, P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages for each count of rape.

The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC's decision, citing AAA's credible testimony as the basis for the affirmation. The CA emphasized that AAA's testimony was straightforward and candid, considering her young age of ten years old. The court also noted her consistency throughout her account, as well as her emotional display during the trial. Additionally, the CA rejected the defense's arguments that AAA had ill motives and was influenced by someone with a grudge against Catalino. The CA believed that the medical findings of non-virgin state corroborated AAA's testimony, even without external signs of injury.

Catalino filed a petition after the CA denied his motion for reconsideration. He argued that the CA erred in giving credence to AAA's testimony, pointing out alleged inconsistencies and flaws. Catalino also claimed that AAA's failure to report the rape, lack of physical injuries, and her visit to his house after the first incident raised doubts about her credibility. He argued that the rape charges were fabricated due to AAA's anger towards him. Catalino further claimed that his denial and alibi defenses were established and should not be disregarded given AAAs doubtful credibility.

The Office of the Solicitor General supported Catalino's conviction, maintaining that the prosecution's evidence, based on AAA's credible testimony, proved his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the accused enjoys the constitutional presumption of innocence until final conviction and whether there is sufficient evidence to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

2. Whether the victim-complainant's testimony in rape cases should be scrutinized with utmost caution and must clearly and definitely establish the commission of the rape and the identity of the perpetrator.

3. Whether the trial judge's findings on the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, particularly the rape complainant, should be given utmost credit.

4. Whether the elements of statutory rape were proven for each count of rape charged against the accused.

5. Whether a delay in reporting a rape can affect the victim's credibility.

6. Whether the absence of fresh lacerations in the victim's hymen negates sexual intercourse and proves that she was not raped.

7. Whether the victim's presence in the defendant's house despite having suffered a prior rape affects her credibility.

8. Whether the victim filed a rape case out of anger against the defendant.

9. Whether the testimony of the victim, AAA, can be given full credit despite contradictions in her statement.

10. Whether the defenses of denial and alibi raised by the accused, Catalino, are credible.

11. Whether the prosecution has established the age of the victim and the sexual intercourse in the first and second rape charges.

12. Whether there is sufficient evidence of sexual intercourse or penile penetration in the third rape charge.

13. Whether the accused can be held liable for attempted rape

14. Whether the accused can be held liable for acts of lasciviousness

RULING:

1. The accused enjoys the constitutional presumption of innocence until final conviction; conviction requires evidence sufficient to establish a moral certainty of guilt, not only with respect to the existence of a crime, but also the identity of the accused as the author of the crime. The prosecution presented evidence that satisfies this burden of proof for the charges of statutory rape against the accused.

2. In rape cases, the victim-complainant's testimony should be scrutinized with utmost caution and must clearly and definitely establish the commission of the rape and the identity of its perpetrator. The victim's positive identification of the accused as the perpetrator through her testimony is sufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

3. The trial judge's findings on the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, particularly the rape complainant, should be given utmost credit unless there is a showing that he misappreciated, misapprehended, or overlooked any material evidentiary fact or circumstance. The trial judge, being in a unique position to appreciate details of the case, is in a better position to assess credibility.

4. The accused was charged with and convicted of three counts of statutory rape, which must be treated as separate and distinct from each other. The elements of statutory rape, such as the age of the complainant, the identity of the accused, and the sexual intercourse between the accused and complainant, were proven for each count of rape.

5. The delay in reporting a rape does not per se affect the victim's credibility. The court must take into account the heavy psychological and social toll that a rape accusation takes on the victim, as well as the effects of threats and fear.

6. The absence of fresh lacerations in the victim's hymen does not negate sexual intercourse or prove that she was not raped. A hymenal laceration or its absence is merely corroborative evidence and not indispensable to a finding of rape. A conviction for rape rests on the complainant's testimony on the details of the crime.

7. The victim's presence in the defendant's house despite having suffered a prior rape should be viewed in the context of their relationship and the fear and control exerted by the defendant. Her presence does not adversely affect her credibility.

8. The defendant failed to provide evidence of an ill motive for the victim to file rape charges. The absence of such evidence strengthens the credibility of the victim and the validity of her charges.

9. The testimony of the victim, AAA, can be given full credit. AAA's willingness to undergo a public trial and describe her experience is considered as her sincerity and the truth of her charges. Her testimony is considered credible in the absence of proof of ill motive.

10. The defenses of denial and alibi raised by the accused, Catalino, are weak and must be supported by clear and convincing evidence to be believed. In this case, Catalino's alibi was found to be insufficient and contradicted by his failure to provide evidence of his employment.

11. The prosecution has established the age of the victim, AAA, through her birth certificate. Moreover, there is sufficient evidence of sexual intercourse between Catalino and AAA in the first and second rape charges.

12. There is no evidence of sexual intercourse or penile penetration in the third rape charge. The prosecution must present evidence of sexual intercourse in each rape charge, and since there is no conclusive proof of carnal knowledge in the third rape charge, Catalino's acquittal on that charge is affirmed.

13. The accused cannot be held liable for attempted rape because the elements of an attempted felony are not present. The evidence on record does not show that the accused commenced the commission of rape directly by overt acts, did not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony, and that his act was not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance. Therefore, the court cannot hold the accused liable for attempted rape.

14. The accused cannot be held liable for acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code because the element of lascivious conduct or lewd act on the part of the accused is not supported by the available evidence. The court cannot conclude that the accused committed acts of lasciviousness as defined and penalized under the Revised Penal Code.

PRINCIPLES:

• The accused enjoys the constitutional presumption of innocence until final conviction.

• Conviction requires evidence sufficient to establish a moral certainty of guilt.

• In rape cases, the victim-complainant's testimony should be scrutinized with utmost caution and must clearly and definitely establish the commission of the rape and the identity of the perpetrator.

• The trial judge's findings on the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, particularly the rape complainant, should be given utmost credit.

• Each count of statutory rape must be proven separately, except for the element of age, which runs commonly for all counts.

• Delay in reporting rape does not per se affect the victim's credibility.

• The absence of fresh lacerations in the victim's hymen does not negate rape.

• The context of the victim's relationship with the defendant and the fear and control exerted should be considered when evaluating her credibility.

• An ill motive must be supported by evidence in order to discredit the victim's charges.

• The testimony of a victim, especially a minor, who alleges sexual assault is given greater weight because no woman would willingly undergo the shame and humiliation of a public trial unless she desires to rectify an injustice and punish the offender.

• Denial and alibi are weak defenses in rape cases and must be supported by clear and convincing evidence.

• For alibi to prosper, the accused must prove that it was physically impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime at the time.

• In rape cases, the prosecution must establish the age of the victim and present clear and convincing evidence of sexual intercourse in each rape charge.

• Attempted rape requires proof of the commencement of the commission of the felony directly by overt acts, the non-performance of all acts of execution due to cause or accident other than the accused's spontaneous desistance, and the absence of detailed acts of execution showing an attempt to rape.

• Acts of lasciviousness require proof of the commission of any act of lasciviousness or lewdness under certain circumstances, such as the use of force or intimidation, the state of the offended party being deprived of reason or unconsciousness, or when the offended party is under 12 years of age.

• When the law specifies certain circumstances that can aggravate an offense, such circumstances must be both alleged and proved to justify the imposition of an increased penalty. Failure to allege such circumstances will not affect the penalty and corresponding civil liabilities.