PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. TOMAS MARCELLANA, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

People versus Marcellana

The Case

This is the People of the Philippines against Tomas Marcellana, an automatic review by the Supreme Court of a conviction for three counts of rape committed by a father against his own sixteen-year-old daughter. The case matters because it gathers into one decision the rules a Bar candidate must know on the credibility of a young rape victim, on delay in reporting, on the father's moral ascendancy as a substitute for force and intimidation, and on why an accused charged with rape cannot be convicted of qualified seduction under the same information.

Procedural History

Tomas Marcellana was charged in three separate informations for rape before the Regional Trial Court, Fifth Judicial Region, Branch 7, Legazpi City. Upon arraignment he pleaded not guilty to each charge. After trial on the merits, the trial court rendered its decision on January 21, 1999, finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of three counts of rape and sentencing him to death on each count, with awards of damages. The case then came to the Supreme Court on automatic review, as the law requires where the death penalty is imposed. The accused raised assigned errors attacking the credibility of the complainant, the finding of guilt, and the imposition of death, contending that at most only qualified seduction was established.

Facts

Francia Marcellana testified that her father, Tomas Marcellana, had been raping her since 1992, and that the last incidents happened on November 10 and November 12, and December 5, 1996. The assaults usually took place at about seven o'clock in the morning, when she was left alone in the house because her classes began at eleven o'clock, her siblings were already in school, and her mother was in the farm. Her father would drag her into the bedroom, undress her, tie her hands and feet to the posts of the bed, lay on top of her, and make push and pull movements for about three minutes. He would then dress, untie one of her hands, and leave her.

She could not tell her mother or her siblings because her father constantly threatened her. Only in December 1996, suspecting that she might be pregnant, did she gather enough courage to reveal her ordeal to her mother. Her mother did not initially believe her, so she went to her high school teacher, who helped her secure assistance from the Department of Social Welfare and Development. Dr. Jose Cope, the Municipal Health Officer of Daraga, Albay, examined her and found one deep old hymenal laceration and multiple superficial lacerations.

A criminal complaint was filed on January 15, 1997, and three separate informations for rape followed. In his defense, the accused simply denied the charges and claimed they were fabrications arising from an isolated incident in which he reprimanded his daughter for going home late. He also suggested that her fiance, Rudy Completo, might have had sexual intercourse with her, and that she may have committed sexual indiscretions on occasions when she came home drunk or late.

Issues

• Whether or not the trial court erred in giving full faith and credence to the testimony of the private complainant.
• Whether or not the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt in each of the three rape charges.
• Whether or not, assuming sexual intercourse took place, the accused may be held liable only for qualified seduction rather than rape, and the death penalty may not be imposed.

Applicable Provisions

Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, is the provision under which the trial court sentenced the accused, and which the Court applies in affirming the conviction:

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, Under Criminal Case No. 7584, the accused is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of DEATH.

This is the penalty provision the Court reviews and upholds for each of the three counts.

Section 25 of Republic Act No. 7659, amending Article 83 of the Revised Penal Code, governs the transmittal of the records after finality, and the Court expressly invokes it in the dispositive portion:

In accordance with Section 25 of Republic Act No. 7659, amending Article 83 of the Revised Penal Code, upon finality of this decision, let certified copies thereof, as well as the records of this case, be forwarded without delay to the Office of the President for possible exercise of executive clemency.

This provision bears on the procedure that follows a death sentence, not on the guilt of the accused.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the trial court did not err in crediting the complainant. The delay in reporting was not fatal, because the delay and initial reluctance of a rape victim to make public the assault on her virtue is neither unknown nor uncommon, and in incestuous rape the Court has consistently held that delay is not indicative of a fabricated charge. The Court quoted its own ruling:

Delay in reporting a rape incident neither diminishes complainant's credibility nor undermines the charges of rape where the delay can be attributed to the pattern of fear instilled by the threats of bodily harm, specially by one who exercised moral ascendancy over the victims.

The Court stressed that the abuse began in 1992, when Francia was only twelve years old, and that she was under her father's moral authority and influence, so she could not be expected to come out in the open. Her testimony was unwavering, clear, convincing, and straightforward, and her credibility was bolstered by her spontaneous emotional breakdown during trial.

On the second issue, the Court refused to demand exactness from a young victim. Inconsistencies on minor details, such as how many times she was raped during a certain month, do not create reasonable doubt. What is important is that Francia remained steadfast in her claim that her father raped her. The attempt to blacken her character by suggesting that her fiance or others had sexual relations with her was a futile attempt to discredit her testimony, unsupported by any basis. The Court observed that no young woman would accuse her father of so grave a crime unless she was truly wronged, and that it is inconceivable that she would fabricate a story that would send her own father to jail.

On the third issue, the Court held that the accused's reliance on the Castillan case was misplaced, because there the complainant and the accused were sweethearts and her testimony showed an inherent lack of credibility on crucial points. Here the relationship is that of father and daughter, and the Court laid down the governing rule:

Where, the rape is committed by a father against his own daughter, the father's moral ascendancy and influence over the latter substitutes for violence and intimidation.

The Court added that failure to shout or offer tenacious resistance will not make a rape victim's submission voluntary. On the claim of qualified seduction, the Court held:

The accused charged with rape cannot be convicted of qualified seduction under the same information. Then, too, rape and qualified seduction are not identical offenses. While the two felonies have one common element which is carnal knowledge of a woman, they significantly vary in all other respects.

Accordingly, the Court upheld the finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt of three counts of rape.

Doctrine

A Bar candidate should retain these rules. First, delay in reporting a rape, especially incestuous rape, does not diminish the complainant's credibility where it is explained by the pattern of fear instilled by the offender's threats and moral ascendancy. Second, minor inconsistencies in a young victim's testimony, such as the exact number of times she was raped, do not create reasonable doubt; exactness cannot be demanded of a child recounting a prolonged ordeal. Third, in rape committed by a father against his own daughter, the father's moral ascendancy and influence substitutes for violence and intimidation, and failure to shout or offer tenacious resistance does not make the victim's submission voluntary. Fourth, an accused charged with rape cannot be convicted of qualified seduction under the same information, because the two offenses are not identical. Fifth, civil indemnity of 75,000 pesos for each count is proper where the rape is qualified by circumstances authorizing the death penalty, and moral damages of 50,000 pesos for each count need no proof beyond the conviction, while exemplary damages require a legal basis.

Disposition

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Tomas Marcellana for three counts of rape and the death sentence on each count, but modified the awards to 75,000 pesos as civil indemnity and 50,000 pesos as moral damages for each count, and deleted the exemplary damages for lack of legal basis.

Remember This

Memorize the line that in incestuous rape the father's moral ascendancy and influence substitutes for violence and intimidation. Examiners use this case to test delay in reporting, minor inconsistencies in a child's testimony, and the rule that rape cannot be downgraded to qualified seduction under the same information.