Case Digest: People vs Meliton Jalbuena GR No 171163
People vs Meliton Jalbuena
GR No 171163 July 4, 2007
Facts:
In the morning of August 1996, AAA a minor, was raped by her father Jalbuena. while her mother BBB was out of the house, Jalbuena approached AAA while she was in bed and pulled down her underwear, placed himself on top of her, and inserted his penis in her vagina. AAA was threatened not to report the incident to anyone, otherwise something bad will happen to her. The incident happened on two other occasions, the last was in the morning and witnessed by her uncle CCC while Jalbuena was on top of her.
CCC reported what he saw to AAA’s grandfather who advised AAA to avoid her father, to an aunt as well as to BBB who refused to believe it. AAA thereafter, told her two classmates about the incident which reported the same to their teacher, who in turned reported and brought her to the school principal.
Dr. Salumbides then examined AAA, the findings was that the hymen was intact and there are no spermatozoa in the vaginal smear.
In contrast to this accusation, Jalbuena’s alibi is that he could not rape AAA for his job as a canvasser of plastic wares required him to be out of the house most of the time, except on Saturdays, but he would return home in the afternoon or evening, which was corroborated by his wife BBB.
The RTC found AAA’s testimony as clear, consistent, direct, and without hesitation when confronted by the presence of her own abuser. Jalbuena’s alibi was not credited there being no proof that it was physically impossible for him to be at the place, date, and time of the commission of the offense. Thus, Jalbuena was convicted and was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Issue:
Whether or not the failure to allege the date and time of the commission of the offense is violative of Jalbuena’s right to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation against him.
Whether or not the failure to present CCC as a witness who allegedly saw Jalbuena on top of AAA will tantamount to willful suppression of evidence and that he is not guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether or not an intact hymen will result to a negative findings for rape.
Whether or not the alibi of Jalbuena is substantial to prove that he is not guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Ruling:
No, it is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the precise time at which the offense was committed except when the time is a material ingredient of the offense (Sec 11 of Rule 110, Rules of Court). In rape, what is necessary is the carnal knowledge of a woman, the date is not an essential element. Jalbuena should have filed a Motion for Bill of Particulars before he entered his plea when he found such information defective.
No, in rape cases, the credibility of the victim is almost always the single most important issue. If the testimony of the victim passes the test of credibility, the accused may be convicted solely on that basis.
No, the fact that the hymen remained intact despite the claim of 3 occasions of rape is not impossible and does not negate a finding that they were committed. A torn or broken hymen is not an essential element of rape. Dr. Salumbides, testified that there are several classes of hymen, some are elastic and flexible that even in cases of several deliveries the hymen remains intact.
No, that for his alibi to prosper, it must be established with clear and convincing evidence not only that he was somewhere else when the crime was committed, but also that it was physically impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime at the time of its commission.
Whether or not the failure to allege the date and time of the commission of the offense is violative of Jalbuena’s right to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation against him.
Whether or not the failure to present CCC as a witness who allegedly saw Jalbuena on top of AAA will tantamount to willful suppression of evidence and that he is not guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether or not an intact hymen will result to a negative findings for rape.
Whether or not the alibi of Jalbuena is substantial to prove that he is not guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Ruling:
No, it is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the precise time at which the offense was committed except when the time is a material ingredient of the offense (Sec 11 of Rule 110, Rules of Court). In rape, what is necessary is the carnal knowledge of a woman, the date is not an essential element. Jalbuena should have filed a Motion for Bill of Particulars before he entered his plea when he found such information defective.
No, in rape cases, the credibility of the victim is almost always the single most important issue. If the testimony of the victim passes the test of credibility, the accused may be convicted solely on that basis.
No, the fact that the hymen remained intact despite the claim of 3 occasions of rape is not impossible and does not negate a finding that they were committed. A torn or broken hymen is not an essential element of rape. Dr. Salumbides, testified that there are several classes of hymen, some are elastic and flexible that even in cases of several deliveries the hymen remains intact.
No, that for his alibi to prosper, it must be established with clear and convincing evidence not only that he was somewhere else when the crime was committed, but also that it was physically impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime at the time of its commission.
Comments
Post a Comment