PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.

RAYMUNDO MAGTIBAY
G.R. No. 142985 | August 6, 2002
Ynares-Santiago, J.

Doctrine: The requisite for complete allegations on the particulars of the indictment is
based on the right of the accused to be fully informed of the nature of the charges against
him so that he may adequately prepare for his defense, pursuant to the due process clause
of the Constitution.

FACTS
An information for rape was filed against the accused-appellant, alleging that he had
carnal knowledge of the victim, Rachelle Recto, against the latter’s will and by means of force
and threats to kill. During arraignment, accused-appellant pleaded not guilty. Trial ensued, and
the prosecution alleged that the victim went to the store to buy something when she noticed
accused-appellant staring at her. On her way home, accused-appellant suddenly puller her,
covered her mouth and threatened that he will kill her if she shouts for help. Thereafter, the
accused-appellant raped her and due to fear for her life, the victim never told anyone about the
said incident. It is only when she became pregnant that she was forced to disclose the happening
to her mother and file the charge against accused-appellant. The trial court issued the assailed
decision in favor of her.
Meanwhile, accused-appellant insists that he was not guilty of the crime charged and that
he was suffering from influenza and cannot even afford to stand. This was corroborated by his
wife and another neighbor. He also faults the trial court for giving credence to the testimony of
the victim, contending that the same was rehearsed.

ISSUES AND HOLDING

1. W/N the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellant of the crime of rape? – NO.
This appeal is buttress on the contention made by accused-appellant that the statement
of the victim was rehearsed and should not be given any credence. However, this claim
lacks merit. The alleged inconsistencies on the victim’s testimony did not deviate from
the gravamen of the crime of rape which is carnal knowledge against her will. Moreover,
there was nothing to be questioned regarding the victim’s act of conferring with her
lawyer and drafting of her sworn affidavit. The defense failed to present evidence that
would warrant an impeachment of the testimony of the victim.
More importantly, it is undisputed that the prosecution was able to prove the
existence of the elements of the crime of rape. The alleged failure of the victim to ask for
help is understandable and based on human nature because she was afraid of the harm
that may possibly go on her way. The lack or even absence of resistance is not necessary
because the law does not impose upon a rape victim the burden of proving resistance.
What is necessary is that the force or intimidation is of such a degree as to impel the
defenseless and hapless victim to bow into submission, as in this case.
As to the penalty imposed on him, the trial court correctly imposed reclusion
perpetua upon him because the age and minority of the victim was not alleged in the
information. The Constitution mandates that the information filed against the accused is
controlling to fully inform him of the nature of case against him and give him enough
time and opportunity to prepare.

SERAPIO C2021 | 1
AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION.

SERAPIO C2021 | 2