People vs.

Dy
Nature: This is an appeal from a decision of RTC which sentenced both the accused
Bryan Dy and Bernardo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of Rape and
acts of lasciviousness.
Facts:
Bryan Dy and Giovan Bernardino were charged with Rape and Acts of
Lasciviousness in a complaint initiated by Gina Marie Mobley.
The prosecution presented Dr. Francisco Hernandez, a neurosurgeon, but not
accredited by The Dangerous Drug Board, as expert witness to corroborate Ginas
testimony that she was drugged.
Dr. Hernandez testified that in the practice of his profession, he uses sedativehypnotic drugs belonging to the benzodiazepine family of drugs. According to him,
he uses these drugs as tools, such that whenever he sees a patient, he can form an
opinion on whether he or she has been drugged.
Based on the set of facts provided by the private prosecutor, the entries in Ginas
journal and the transcript of stenographic notes taken during the preliminary
examination conducted by the trial court in the afternoon of January 26 and 27,
1994, Dr. Hernandez opined that Gina and Helen were drugged, possibly with
lorazepam or ativan, which is a benzodiazepine.
The defense presented two (2) expert witnesses to counter Dr. Hernandezs opinion.
Dr. Rey San Pedro, a psychiatrist, opined that Gina and Helen could not have been
drugged because they have not been medically examined for the presence of drugs
in their system. Neither were the cups used by Gina and Helen examined if they
were indeed laced with drugs. Instead, the condition described by the girls based on
the documents given by the defense could have been caused by the alcoholic
drinks.
The second expert witness, Dr. Pedro Solis, testified that a person who imbibes
alcohol goes through three stages, namely: (a) stage of excitement; (b) stage of
intoxication or the proprioception stage; and (c) stage of being dead drunk or the
toxic stage.
On the basis of the statement of facts and documents provided him by the defense,
Gina was only at the first stage, the stage of excitement due to her alcohol intake
for the following reasons: she had the power to coordinate when she caught the
room key thrown to her by Helen with one hand; she could properly walk; and she
could properly reason out when she decided to do oral sex on Bryan in order to
avoid sexual intercourse.
He said it could not be definitely concluded that the girls were drugged because no
drug test was conducted. He added that mere observance of the clinical symptoms
can not be a basis for concluding that they were drugged.

The trial court gave credence to the version of the prosecution thus convicting both
the accused for the crimes of Rape and Act of lasciviousness.
Issue:
Whether the trial court erred in its assessment of the credibility of Dr. Hernandezs
as expert witness.
Ruling:
1.The Supreme Court held that although Dr. Hernandez has not been accredited as
an expert by the Dangerous Drugs Board does not necessarily mean that he is not
an expert on the effects of drugs, as accused-appellant Dy would like this Court to
believe.
Accreditation by the Board is not an essential element of expertise. More properly,
expertise pertains to knowledge and experience as well as relevant exposure to a
particular field of discipline. It appears that Dr. Hernandez has met these latter
requisites.