FACTS:

The case involves Rodolfo Sanchez, also known as "Rudy," who was accused of multiple counts of rape against his stepdaughter, AAA, a 14-year-old secondary school student. In a criminal complaint and subsequent informations, it was alleged that Sanchez committed these acts from February to October 1993. According to the complaint filed by AAA, Sanchez repeatedly subjected her to sexual assault every Saturday when AAA's mother, BBB, was away selling fish. AAA testified that Sanchez, using force and intimidation, including brandishing a knife, coerced her into sexual acts against her will. After each incident, Sanchez threatened AAA not to disclose the assaults, warning that he would kill her and her mother if she told anyone. The abuse reportedly became a routine while other relatives were playing outside the house. Overcome with fear and further discouraged by her mother's dismissive response when she initially disclosed the abuse, AAA remained silent for months until October 2, 1993, when she confided in her aunt, Paulina Collado. Collado, accompanied by a cousin of the accused, brought AAA to the police, where the complaints were eventually formalized. During the investigation, AAA's medical examination revealed old hymenal lacerations, supporting her allegations of repeated sexual abuse. Despite Sanchez's alibi and denials, asserting he was away for work during the periods in question, the trial court found inconsistencies in the defense testimony, leading to his conviction for 33 counts of rape, each carrying a sentence of reclusion perpetua and payment of damages to AAA.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the trial court erred in finding Rodolfo Sanchez guilty beyond reasonable doubt of thirty-three counts of rape.

2. Whether the trial court erred in relying on the testimony of the prosecution witnesses.

3. Whether the court erred in disregarding the defense of denial and alibi.

4. Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused of qualified rape instead of simple rape.

5. Whether the trial court erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance of abuse of confidence.

6. Whether the trial court erred in not applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

7. Whether the trial court erred in awarding excessive civil damages.

RULING:

The appeal is found to be without merit. The Supreme Court found sufficient evidence to support the conviction of Rodolfo Sanchez for thirty-two counts of rape. The testimony of the victim, AAA, was deemed credible, natural, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things. The victim’s emotional state during her testimony and the absence of substantial facts overlooked by the trial court warranted the affirmation of the accused’s conviction. The defense of denial and alibi was weak, and the court emphasized that an accused could only be convicted for the offenses charged and proven, resulting in a conviction for thirty-two counts instead of thirty-three.

PRINCIPLES:

1. An accusation for rape requires careful scrutiny due to its intrinsic nature, typically involving only two persons.

2. The credibility of the complainant's testimony is vital, especially when the crime is difficult to prove but even harder for the accused to disprove.

3. Delay in reporting rape does not automatically impugn the credibility of the complainant.

4. Flight from investigation or arrest is an indication of guilt.

5. The accused may only be convicted of offenses that are both charged and proven.

6. Reclusion perpetua is an indivisible penalty without a minimum, medium, or maximum period.

7. The three-fold rule and the 40-year limit under Article 70, Revised Penal Code, apply to the service of penalties.