FACTS:

Gerry Lining and Lian Salvacion were charged with the crime of abduction with rape. The incident occurred on October 5, 1997, at around 1:00 am, in Barangay Mabuslot, Pinamalayan, Oriental Mindoro. Emelina Ornos, then 15 years old, had gone to visit her aunt's house and was invited to a dance party by a man named Sajer. Emelina attended the party with her aunt but was left alone when her aunt went home. On her way home, Emelina was accosted by Gerry Lining and Lian Salvacion, who were her former neighbors. Lining held a kitchen knife to Emelina's breast while Salvacion held her hands. They dragged her to an unoccupied house and forcibly carried her inside. Lining removed Emelina's clothes, pushed her to the floor, and had sexual intercourse with her. Salvacion also had sexual intercourse with her afterwards. Emelina shouted for help, but a passerby named Russel Bolquerin who tried to help was told not to interfere. After the attack, Lining and Salvacion directed Emelina to put her clothes back on. They looked for a vehicle to bring her to another barangay but Emelina managed to escape and went to her aunt's house. Due to fear, she did not immediately disclose the incident to her aunt but instead sought help from a friend who accompanied her to the barangay captain and eventually to the police. Emelina underwent a medical examination, which showed signs of sexual intercourse. Lining denied the accusations and presented witnesses who testified that he was with them during the incident. However, the trial court found Lining guilty and sentenced him to two death penalties.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty of the crime of rape.

2. Whether the trial court erred in imposing the death penalty on the accused.

3. Whether the alibi presented by accused-appellant is sufficient to overturn the positive identification by the victim.

4. Whether the inconsistencies in the testimonies of the defense witnesses weaken the defense's claims.

5. Whether the non-presentation of a witness to corroborate the victim's testimony weakens the prosecution's case.

6. Whether the previous sexual history or absence of physical injuries of the victim affects the finding of rape.

7. Whether accused-appellant can be convicted of the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape.

8. Whether the aggravating circumstances of nocturnity and abuse of superior strength should be appreciated.

9. Whether the use of a knife in the commission of the rape should be considered as an aggravating circumstance.

10. Whether the imposable penalty for the rape committed by two or more persons should be imposed.

11. Whether the award of damages is proper.

12. Whether or not the guilt of the accused-appellant for the charges of rape has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

13. Whether or not the accused-appellant should be ordered to pay civil indemnity and moral damages to the victim.

RULING:

1. The court finds no reason to reverse the findings of the trial court. The credibility of the witness, Emelina Ornos, is not in doubt as her straightforward and candid testimony during the trial is more credible than the testimonies of the defense witnesses. Therefore, the court affirms the trial court's finding of guilt for the crime of rape.

2. The court agrees with the defense's argument that the death penalty should not be imposed on the accused. The imposition of the supreme penalty of death is not warranted in this case. The court finds that the trial court committed an error in imposing the death penalty. Instead, the accused should be sentenced to the appropriate penalty provided by law.

3. The alibi presented by accused-appellant is weak and is not enough to overturn the positive identification by the victim.

4. The inconsistencies in the testimonies of the defense witnesses cast doubt on the veracity of their claims.

5. The non-presentation of a witness to corroborate the victim's testimony does not weaken the prosecution's case, as corroborative testimony is not necessary in rape cases.

6. The previous sexual history and absence of physical injuries of the victim do not negate the finding of rape.

7. Accused-appellant can only be convicted of the crime of rape, as forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape.

8. The aggravating circumstances of nocturnity and abuse of superior strength are not applicable in this case.

9. The use of a knife in the commission of the rape cannot be considered as an aggravating circumstance, as there was no evidence that it was used to subdue the victim during the rape.

10. The imposable penalty for the rape committed by two or more persons shall be applied, with the lesser penalty since no aggravating circumstance was proved.

11. The award of damages for civil indemnity and moral damages is proper.

12. The guilt of the accused-appellant for the charges of rape has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

13. The accused-appellant is ordered to pay the victim the sum of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages for each count of rape.

PRINCIPLES:

• Factual findings of the trial court are given respect and finality, considering that the trial judge had the unique opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses as they testify.

• Credibility of the witness plays a significant role in the determination of guilt in criminal cases.

• Imposition of the death penalty requires strict adherence to the legal requirements and should only be imposed when warranted by the circumstances of the case and in accordance with the provisions of the law.

• Alibi is weak in the face of positive identification by the victim.

• Inconsistencies in the testimonies of defense witnesses cast doubt on their credibility.

• Corroborative testimony is not necessary in rape cases; the lone testimony of the victim may suffice.

• Previous sexual history or absence of physical injuries does not affect the finding of rape.

• Forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape when the main objective is to rape the victim.

• Nocturnity is not an aggravating circumstance in rape cases.

• Abuse of superior strength is an inherent element of the crime of rape.

• The use of a knife in the commission of rape can only be considered as an aggravating circumstance if it is used to subdue the victim.

• The imposable penalty for rape committed by two or more persons is reclusion perpetua to death, but if no aggravating circumstance is proved, the lesser penalty shall be applied.

• Damages can be awarded for civil indemnity and moral damages in rape cases.

• The guilt of the accused in a criminal case must be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

• A person convicted of rape may be ordered to pay civil indemnity and moral damages to the victim.