People vs. Taño

Robbery with rape is not committed when the taking of property is conceived and carried out only as an afterthought after the rape has already been consummated; the accused is guilty of two separate crimes of rape and robbery. Dwelling is not aggravating when the crime is committed in a commercial establishment open to the public, even if the upper floor is used as a residence.

Amy de Guzman worked at a video rental shop owned by her cousin Ana Marinay in Caloocan City; the shop occupied the ground floor of a two-story structure, while the upper floor was used as a residence. Alexander Taño y Caballero was a relative of Ana’s husband, Gerry Marinay, and was known to Amy as a frequent visitor to the shop.

At around 7:30 p.m. on November 6, 1997, Amy de Guzman was tending the video rental shop at 153 Loreto Street, Morning Breeze Subdivision, Caloocan City, owned by her employer and cousin Ana Marinay. Alexander Taño y Caballero, a relative of Ana’s husband Gerry Marinay, arrived and asked Amy what time Gerry would come home; she replied 10:00 p.m. He then asked what time Ana would come home, and Amy said she did not know. Taño kept going in and out of the shop. On his last entry, he jumped over the counter, seized Amy by placing one arm around her neck, and poked a knife at her neck with his other hand. Terrified, Amy shouted for help, but Taño increased the volume of the karaoke to drown her cries. He dragged her to the kitchen, ordered her at knifepoint to undress, and raped her. While he was raping her, someone knocked at the door, prompting him to stop and order Amy to put on her clothes. He then directed her to go upstairs to the second floor to change clothes because he would take her with him. Suddenly, he pulled her down and punched her in the stomach three times, causing her to lose balance. He cursed her and again placed himself on top of her while poking a knife at her neck. Amy pleaded with him to take anything inside the shop and spare her life, but he replied, “no, I will not leave you here alive.” After a while, upon her pleading, Taño put down his knife and, while kissing Amy, she got hold of the knife and surreptitiously concealed it under the stairs. Taño became violent again and banged Amy’s head on the wall, causing her to lose consciousness. When she regained consciousness, she found herself and Taño inside the toilet; he again banged her head on the toilet bowl several times, causing her to lose consciousness again. Thereafter, Taño went upstairs and looted the place of valuables belonging to Ana; Amy herself lost her ring, bracelet, and wristwatch during the incident.

At about 9:00 p.m. of the same day, Ana arrived and found the shop in disarray with the karaoke in full volume. After turning off the karaoke, she proceeded to the toilet and found Amy bathed in blood. Ana sought the help of barangay officials, and Amy was brought to the MCU Hospital where she was initially treated; she was later transferred to Jose P. Reyes Memorial Medical Center where she was confined for four days. The Information dated November 10, 1997 charged Taño with robbery with rape, alleging the taking of P5,000 cash, three bracelets worth P3,500, two rings worth P5,000, one pair of earrings worth P2,000, and one Alba wristwatch worth P1,500, for a total of P16,000, belonging to Ana Marinay, and the rape of Amy with the use of force and intimidation and a bladed weapon. During his arrest, stolen valuables were found in his bag: P5,000 cash, two bracelets, two rings, and a pair of earrings identified by Ana as hers; and one wristwatch and a bracelet belonging to Amy.

Dr. Godofredo Balderosa and Dr. Ma. Redencion Bukid-Abella, who examined and treated Amy immediately after the incident, both stated that Amy complained to them of physical assault and attempted rape only, not consummated rape. NBI Medico-Legal Officer Aurea Villena’s findings were allegedly inconclusive as to whether sexual intercourse occurred. Dra. Aurea Villena of the Jose R. Reyes Memorial Hospital conducted a medico-legal examination of Amy’s genital organ four days later; she found Amy’s hymen to be elastic and distensible, capable of accommodating the penis without producing genital injuries, and explained that lacerations occur only on non-elastic hymen.

Taño, for his part, testified that at around 7:40 p.m. on November 6, 1997, he went to the house of his cousin Gerry Bautista Marinay at 113 Loreto Street, Morning Breeze Subdivision, Caloocan City, and found Amy alone there. She greeted him because she knew he was a frequent visitor. Upon learning Gerry was not around, he proceeded to the kitchen to drink water; after buying cigarettes at a nearby store, he returned to the shop and sat in front of Amy’s counter. After five minutes he got bored and went out again to wait for Gerry. After finishing his cigarette, he returned to Amy and talked with her, learning that Ana was at her newly opened restaurant. After a while, the thought of stealing his cousin’s valuables struck him because of his dire need for cash. He approached Amy, held her hands, and asked her to come with him because he badly needed money and to lead him to where his cousin kept money and valuables. Amy shouted; to stop her, he covered her mouth with his right hand, but she struggled and they both fell and rolled on the floor. He subdued her and forcibly took her upstairs, where he ransacked drawers while holding her hand. She freed herself and ran downstairs to the kitchen, where she tried to get hold of a knife, but he wrested it from her. Rattled, he pushed Amy inside the comfort room and shoved her head against the tiles to muffle her. He took Amy’s bag and placed his loot in it—two wristwatches including Amy’s Alba watch, a bracelet, clothes, a hair blower, and a jewelry box containing five rings, which he placed in his pocket—then proceeded to his brother’s house in Taytay. Upon arrival of the police and his cousin, he returned the jewelry box to the latter, but it was not presented in court. He claimed he took no other jewelry except those specified and no cash from Gerry; he had a wife in Iloilo and a girlfriend in Manila; he never raped Amy and had not courted her before the incident.

The RTC found Amy’s testimony candid, straightforward, spontaneous, and frank, and observed that she remained consistent and unwavering despite rigid cross-examination; it found no evil motive or ill will on her part. It accepted Taño’s judicial admission that he stole valuables belonging to Amy and her employer. The RTC appreciated dwelling as an aggravating circumstance because the incident took place at the residence of Amy’s employer, which doubled as a video rental shop. The evidence also showed that the building had two floors: the ground floor was operated as a video rental shop, and the upper floor was used as a residence; the rape was committed in the video rental shop, while the kitchen and toilet were adjacent to and formed parts of the store.

• Medical Evidence: Petitioner-appellant argued that the RTC erred in not taking into consideration the testimonies of Dr. Godofredo Balderosa and Dr. Ma. Redencion Bukid-Abella, which allegedly negate the rape charge; both doctors stated that Amy complained only of physical assault and attempted rape, not consummated rape, and NBI Medico-Legal Officer Aurea Villena’s findings were allegedly inconclusive on whether sexual intercourse occurred. He claimed that Amy’s failure to immediately disclose the rape to her examining physicians could only mean she was not sexually assaulted, and that the absence of genital and other injuries proved his innocence.
• Sufficiency of Evidence: Petitioner-appellant argued that the RTC erred in finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with rape despite the prosecution’s insufficiency of evidence.

• Medical Evidence: Whether the RTC erred in not giving due credence to the testimonies of Dr. Godofredo Balderosa and Dr. Ma. Redencion Bukid-Abella, which allegedly negate the rape charge.
• Sufficiency of Prosecution Evidence: Whether the RTC erred in finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with rape despite insufficiency of evidence.
• Crime Committed: Whether appellant should be convicted of the special complex crime of robbery with rape or of two separate crimes of rape and robbery.
• Dwelling: Whether dwelling can be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance.
• Penalty: Whether the proper penalty for rape is reclusion perpetua or death, and what penalties and damages should be imposed.

• Medical Evidence: No. The doctors’ testimonies did not negate rape; Amy’s initial reluctance to disclose the rape and the absence of genital injuries do not preclude rape, especially since the examining physician explained that her elastic hymen could accommodate the penis without injury.
• Sufficiency of Prosecution Evidence: No. Amy’s candid and consistent testimony established rape, and Taño admitted the unlawful taking; stolen valuables were found in his possession.
• Crime Committed: Two separate crimes. The taking was conceived and carried out only after the rape was consummated, so the special complex crime of robbery with rape was not established.
• Dwelling: No. The rape was committed in the ground-floor video rental shop open to the public, not in a private abode entitled to the sanctity of privacy.
• Penalty: Reclusion perpetua for rape, not death, absent an aggravating circumstance; robbery carries an indeterminate penalty under the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

• Medical Evidence: The SC held that the vacillation of a rape victim in reporting the crime is not necessarily an indication of a fabricated charge, nor does it always cast doubt on the victim’s credibility. The initial reluctance of a young, inexperienced woman to admit having been ravished is normal and natural; the SC took judicial notice of the Filipina’s inbred modesty and shyness and her antipathy in publicly airing acts that blemish her honor and virtue. Amy initially downplayed the assault by telling the doctors that there was no consummation, but the following day she revealed the entire truth to Ana Marinay and executed a Sworn Statement before PO3 Jaime Basa; four days later she underwent a medico-legal examination by Dra. Aurea Villena. No ill motive was imputed to Amy, and the RTC observed her to be candid, straightforward, spontaneous, and frank, consistent and unwavering despite rigid cross-examination. The SC also ruled that hymenal laceration is not an element of rape; even the slightest penetration of the labia by the male organ is equivalent to consummated rape. The examining physician satisfactorily explained the absence of lacerations because Amy’s hymen was elastic and distensible and could accommodate the penis without producing genital injuries. Thus, the doctors’ testimonies did not negate the rape charge.

• Sufficiency of Prosecution Evidence: The SC applied the rule that when a victim cries rape, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that the crime was inflicted on her, and so long as her testimony meets the test of credibility, the accused may be convicted on its basis. Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following instances: force or intimidation, deprivation of reason or unconsciousness, or under twelve years of age. Amy’s testimony established the elements: Taño jumped over the counter, strangled her, poked a knife at her neck, dragged her to the kitchen, ordered her to undress, forced her legs apart, inserted his penis, and kept pumping, causing her pain. The RTC’s findings on credibility were entitled to great weight because trial judges can directly observe witnesses. As to robbery, its elements are: personal property belonging to another, unlawful taking, intent to gain, and violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon things. Taño openly admitted the unlawful asportation of the jewelry box, clothes, and other valuables, and stolen valuables were found in his bag during arrest. The unrebutted presumption that a person in possession of stolen personal effects is considered the author of the crime applied. The prosecution evidence was therefore sufficient.

• Crime Committed: The SC held that the special complex crime of robbery with rape contemplates a situation where the original intent of the accused was to take, with intent to gain, personal property belonging to another, and rape is committed on the occasion thereof or as an accompanying crime. That circumstance did not obtain. Amy testified that Taño suddenly jumped over the counter, strangled her, poked a knife at her neck, pulled her toward the kitchen, forced her to undress, and raped her. Thereafter, he ordered her to proceed upstairs to get some clothes so he could bring her out, saying he was not leaving her alive. At that point, before they could reach the upper floor, he suddenly pulled Amy down and mauled her until she lost consciousness; then he ransacked the place. Leaving Amy for dead after repeatedly banging her head on the wall and the toilet bowl, he took her bracelet, ring, and wristwatch, then proceeded upstairs and took the jewelry box containing other valuables belonging to her employer. The asportation was conceived and carried out as an afterthought and only after the rape had been consummated. Hence, Taño committed two separate offenses: rape with the use of a deadly weapon and simple robbery with force and intimidation against persons. The SC further held that Taño could be convicted of the separate offenses notwithstanding that the Information was titled “Robbery with Rape.” Controlling is not the title of the complaint nor the designation of the offense charged, but the description of the crime charged and the particular facts recited. The Information sufficiently alleged all the elements necessary to convict him of the two separate crimes, and Taño failed to move for quashal before arraignment, thereby waiving any objection; he may thus be found guilty of as many offenses as those charged in the Information and proven during trial. The SC relied on People vs. Barrientos for this rule.

• Dwelling: The SC held that dwelling aggravates a felony when the crime was committed in the residence of the offended party and the latter has not given any provocation. It is considered aggravating primarily because of the sanctity of privacy that the law accords to human abode; one’s dwelling place is a sanctuary worthy of respect, and commission of a crime in another’s dwelling shows worse perversity and produces graver alarm. In this case, the building where the two offenses were committed was not entirely for dwelling purposes. It consisted of two floors: the ground floor was operated as a video rental shop, and the upper floor was used as a residence. The rape was committed in the video rental shop. The victim was dragged to the kitchen and toilet, but these sections were adjacent to and formed parts of the store. Being a commercial shop that caters to the public, the video rental outlet was open to the public and was not attributed the sanctity of privacy that jurisprudence accords to residential abodes. Hence, dwelling could not be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance in the crime of rape.

• Penalty: Under Article 335, paragraph 3, of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, whenever rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon, the penalty is reclusion perpetua to death. Under Article 63 of the same Code, reclusion perpetua is the appropriate penalty for rape because no aggravating circumstance was proven. The award of P50,000 as indemnity ex delicto is mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape. Moral damages may additionally be awarded in such amount as the SC deems just, without need of pleading or proof of the basis thereof; in rape cases, the victim’s moral injury is concomitant with and necessarily results from the odiousness of the crime. The SC awarded P30,000 as moral damages, but no exemplary damages because no aggravating circumstance attended the rape. For robbery, Article 294, no. 5, of the Revised Penal Code provides the penalty of prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period, and Taño was entitled to the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law. The RTC awarded P2,687.65 as actual damages based on receipts, but recomputation revealed a total of only P2,487.65, so the SC reduced the award. The RTC also ordered Taño to restore a gold ring of undetermined amount, but the stolen items were all accounted for and had been ordered released to Ana Marinay and Amy de Guzman by SC Resolution dated December 7, 1999; there was no sufficient basis for that order. Moral damages in robbery are not automatic and must be supported by proof of moral suffering, mental anguish, serious anxiety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, or similar injury; the private complainants presented no such evidence, so no moral damages were awarded for robbery.

• Special complex crime of robbery with rape — The felony requires that the original intent of the accused was to take personal property with intent to gain, and that rape is committed on the occasion thereof or as an accompanying crime. If the taking is conceived and carried out only as an afterthought after the rape has been consummated, the special complex crime is not committed; the accused is guilty of two separate crimes of rape and robbery.
• Dwelling as aggravating circumstance — Dwelling aggravates a felony when the crime is committed in the residence of the offended party and the latter has not given any provocation. It is not appreciated when the crime is committed in a commercial establishment open to the public, even if the upper floor of the structure is used as a residence.
• Credibility of rape victim; initial reluctance — The vacillation of a rape victim in reporting the crime is not necessarily an indication of a fabricated charge. The initial reluctance of a young, inexperienced woman to admit having been ravished is normal and natural, consistent with the Filipina’s inbred modesty and shyness. Absent ill motive, the victim’s candid and consistent testimony is given full faith and credit.
• Absence of genital injuries — Hymenal laceration is not an element of rape. Even the slightest penetration of the labia by the male organ is equivalent to consummated rape. An elastic and distensible hymen may accommodate the penis without producing genital injuries.
• Conviction of separate offenses despite information title — The controlling factor is not the title of the complaint nor the designation of the offense charged, but the description of the crime charged and the particular facts recited. If the Information sufficiently alleges the elements of separate offenses and the accused fails to move for quashal before arraignment, he may be convicted of as many offenses as those charged and proven.
• Presumption from possession of stolen effects — A person in possession of stolen personal effects is considered the author of the crime. The presumption applied because stolen valuables were found in Taño’s bag during his arrest.
• Moral damages — In rape cases, the victim’s moral injury is concomitant with and necessarily results from the odiousness of the crime, so moral damages may be awarded without pleading or proof of the basis thereof. In robbery and other common crimes, moral damages are not automatic and must be supported by proof of moral suffering or similar injury.
• Indeterminate Sentence Law — The appellant is entitled to the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law for the crime of robbery, for which the SC imposed an indeterminate penalty.

• “The appellant cannot be convicted of the special complex crime of robbery with rape because the asportation was conceived and carried out as an afterthought and only after the rape has been consummated.” — This states the ratio for rejecting the special complex crime and treating the acts as separate offenses of rape and robbery.
• “Dwelling aggravates a felony when the crime was committed in the residence of the offended party and the latter has not given any provocation.” — This is the rule the SC applied to reject dwelling as an aggravating circumstance because the rape occurred in a ground-floor video rental shop open to the public.
• “Controlling in an Information should not be the title of the complaint, nor the designation of the offense charged or the particular law or part thereof allegedly violated, these being, by and large, mere conclusions of law made by the prosecutor, but the description of the crime charged and the particular facts therein recited.” — This supports convicting Taño of separate offenses despite the Information’s title of “Robbery with Rape.”
• “In rape cases, it is recognized that the victim's moral injury is concomitant with and necessarily results from the odiousness of the crime to warrant the grant of moral damages.” — This explains the award of moral damages for rape even without separate proof of the victim’s moral suffering.

• People vs. Barrientos, 285 SCRA 221 (1998) — Relied on to allow conviction of two separate crimes of rape and robbery even though the Information was titled “Robbery with Rape,” because the facts alleged and proven controlled.
• People vs. Llaguno, 285 SCRA 124 (1998) — Cited for the rule that an appeal in a criminal case throws the whole case open for review, allowing the SC to correct errors not specifically assigned.
• People vs. Escober, 281 SCRA 498 (1997) — Cited on the credibility of a rape victim and the rule that initial reluctance to disclose the crime does not necessarily indicate a fabricated charge.
• People vs. Garcia, 281 SCRA 463 (1997) — Cited for the rule that when a victim testifies that she was raped, she says all that is necessary to show that rape was committed, and for the sufficiency of her credible testimony.
• People vs. Borja, 267 SCRA 370 (1997) — Cited for the rule that the slightest penetration of the labia by the male organ is equivalent to consummated rape.
• People vs. Paraiso, G.R. No. 127840 (1999) — Cited for the rule that dwelling aggravates a felony when the crime is committed in the residence of the offended party without provocation.
• People vs. Maglente, 306 SCRA 546 (1999) — Cited for the rule that the award of P50,000 as indemnity ex delicto is mandatory upon a finding of rape.
• People vs. Sumalpong, 284 SCRA 464 (1998) — Cited on deference to trial court credibility findings and on the requirement of proof for moral damages in robbery.

• Article 335, paragraph 3, Revised Penal Code, as amended — Rape with the use of a deadly weapon is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death; the SC applied reclusion perpetua because no aggravating circumstance was proven.
• Article 63, Revised Penal Code — Where the penalty is reclusion perpetua to death and no aggravating circumstance attends the crime, reclusion perpetua is the appropriate penalty; applied to the rape.
• Article 294, no. 5, Revised Penal Code — Robbery with force and intimidation against persons is punishable by prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period; applied to the robbery.
• Indeterminate Sentence Law — Taño was entitled to its benefits for the robbery; the SC imposed an indeterminate penalty of two years and four months of prision correccional, as minimum, to eight years of prision mayor, as maximum.
• Article 2230, Civil Code — Exemplary damages may be awarded only when an aggravating circumstance attends the crime; no exemplary damages were awarded because no aggravating circumstance attended the rape.