View full case

PEOPLE v. NICOLAS TUBILLO Y ABELLA

FACTS:

Nicolas Tubillo was charged with the crime of simple rape in relation to Republic Act No. 7610. The information alleged that Tubillo, through force, violence, and intimidation, committed sexual assault against a minor, HGE, who was 13 years old at the time of the incident. It was alleged that Tubillo forcibly entered the house where HGE was sleeping alone and proceeded to undress her and have sexual intercourse with her without her consent. HGE testified during the trial, recounting the details of the incident. Dr. Paul Ortiz, the medico-legal officer who examined HGE, also testified and presented the results of his examination. Tubillo, on the other hand, denied the accusations and claimed that the complaint was filed out of anger towards him. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Tubillo guilty of simple rape, while the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction with modifications, applying the penalties under both the Revised Penal Code and Republic Act No. 7610. Tubillo appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that his guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether Tubillo committed the crime of rape through force and intimidation against HGE.

  2. Whether Tubillo should be convicted under Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610 or under Article 266-A(1) of the Revised Penal Code.

  3. Whether the accused should be convicted of rape under Article 266-A (1) (a) of the RPC or violation of Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610.

  4. Whether the damages awarded by the lower courts should be modified.

RULING:

  1. Tubillo committed the crime of rape through force and intimidation against HGE.

  2. Tubillo should be convicted under Article 266-A(1) of the Revised Penal Code.

  3. The accused should be convicted of rape under Article 266-A (1) (a) of the RPC. The evidence presented by the prosecution focused on the force or intimidation employed by the accused against the victim, which is in line with the elements of rape under Article 266-A (1) (a) of the RPC.

  4. The damages awarded by the lower courts should be modified. In accordance with People v. Jugueta, the accused is ordered to pay P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Elements of rape under Article 266-A(1) of the Revised Penal Code.

  • Corroboration of testimony by medical findings.

  • Mere denial without strong evidence cannot overcome positive declaration by the victim.

  • Fear as a reason for delayed reporting of abuse.

  • In sexual abuse cases involving minors, "coercion and influence" can be considered as "force and intimidation".

  • The offense of rape and violation of Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610 cannot be charged for the same act to avoid double jeopardy.

  • When a case involves both the elements of rape under the Revised Penal Code (RPC) and violation of a provision under the Revised Penal Code No. 7610 (R.A. No. 7610), the court must examine the evidence of the prosecution to determine whether it focused on the specific force or intimidation employed by the offender or on the broader concept of coercion or influence.

  • In cases where the evidence unequivocally focuses on the force or intimidation employed, the accused should be convicted of rape under Article 266-A (1) (a) of the RPC.

  • In cases where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, the minimum indemnity and damages to be awarded are P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages.