SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.

html

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

G.R. No. 223708. June 28, 2017.*

 
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.
NORIETO MONROYO y MAHAGUAY, accused-appellant.

Remedial Law; Criminal Procedure; Information; It is settled

that a designation in the information of the specific statute
violated is imperative to avoid surprise on the accused and to
afford him the opportunity to prepare his defense.—Preliminarily,
although the three Informations designated the crime committed
only as “Acts of Lasciviousness,” the facts alleged therein pertain
not only to violations of Article 336 of the RPC but also of Section
5(b) of RA 7610, otherwise known as the “Special Protection of
Children Against

_______________

** Per Special Order No. 2445 dated June 16, 2017.

*  FIRST DIVISION.

 
 
417

VOL. 828, JUNE 28, 2017 417

People vs. Monroyo

1 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act.” It is settled that

a designation in the information of the specific statute violated is
imperative to avoid surprise on the accused and to afford him the
opportunity to prepare his defense. Nevertheless, the erroneous
reference to the law violated does not vitiate the information if the
facts alleged therein clearly recite the facts constituting the crime
charged. As the Court had ruled, the real nature of the criminal
charge is determined not from the caption or preamble of the
information, or from the specification of the legal provision alleged
to have been violated, which are mere conclusions of law, but by
the actual recital of facts in the information. In the present case,
the recital of facts in the Informations constitute violations of Acts
of Lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC in relation to
Section 5(b) of RA 7610.
Criminal Law; Acts of Lasciviousness; Elements of.—Article
336 of the RPC provides: Article 336. Acts of Lasciviousness.—
Any person who shall commit any act of lasciviousness upon other
persons of either sex, under any of the circumstances mentioned
in the preceding article, shall be punished by prisión correccional.
Its elements are: (1) that the offender commits any act of
lasciviousness or lewdness; (2) that it is done (a) by using force or
intimidation, or (b) when the offended party is deprived of reason
or otherwise unconscious, or (c) when the offended party is under
twelve (12) years of age; and (3) that the offended party is another
person of either sex.
Same; Child Abuse Law; Child Prostitution and Other Sexual
Abuse; Elements of.—The elements under Section 5(b) of RA 7610
are: (1) the accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or
lascivious conduct; (2) the said act is performed with a child
exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse; and
(3) the child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age. In
Quimvel v. People, 823 SCRA 192 (2017), the Court held that the
allegation of “force and intimidation” is sufficient to classify the
minor victim as one who is “exploited in prostitution or subjected
to other sexual abuse.”
Same; Same; Same; Lewd; Words and Phrases; The term
“lewd” is commonly defined as something indecent or obscene.
—Common to both legal provisions is the element of lascivious
conduct or lewdness. The term “lewd” is commonly defined as
something indecent or

 
 
418

2 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

418 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo
obscene. It is characterized by or intended to excite crude
sexual desire. That an accused is entertaining a lewd or unchaste
design is a mental process that can be inferred by overt acts
carrying out such intention, i.e., by conduct that can only be
interpreted as lewd or lascivious.
Remedial Law; Evidence; Findings of Fact; Case law dictates
that factual findings of the trial court, particularly when affirmed
by the Court of Appeals (CA), are binding on the Supreme Court
(SC) barring arbitrariness and oversight of some fact or
circumstance of weight and substance, of which there are none in
this case.—Verily, AAA’s testimony is worthy of full faith and
credence as there is no proof that she was motivated to falsely
accuse Monroyo of the crimes charged. To this, it may not be
amiss to state that in several cases, the Court has observed that
no young and decent girl (like AAA in this case) would fabricate a
story of sexual abuse, subject herself to undergo public trial, with
concomitant ridicule and humiliation, if she is not impelled by a
sincere desire to put behind bars the person who assaulted her.
Ultimately, the credibility of AAA’s testimony, as well as
Monroyo’s opposite account involves findings of fact which the
Court does not generally review. Case law dictates that factual
findings of the trial court, particularly when affirmed by the CA,
are binding on the Court barring arbitrariness and oversight of
some fact or circumstance of weight and substance, of which there
are none in this case.
Same; Criminal Procedure; Appeals; Well-settled is the rule
that an appeal in a criminal case opens the entire case for scrutiny
on any question, even one not raised by the parties as errors, and
that the appeal confers the appellate court with full jurisdiction
over the case, enabling the court to examine records, revise the
judgment appealed from, increase the penalty, and cite the proper
provision of the penal law.—Well-settled is the rule that an appeal
in a criminal case opens the entire case for scrutiny on any
question, even one not raised by the parties as errors, and that
the appeal confers the appellate court with full jurisdiction over
the case, enabling the court to examine records, revise the
judgment appealed from, increase the penalty, and cite the proper
provision of the penal law. Thus, given that the circumstances of
minority and relationship were alleged and proven in this case,
the Court examines Monroyo’s criminal liability for Qualified
Rape as charged.

 
 

3 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

419

VOL. 828, JUNE 28, 2017 419

People vs. Monroyo

Criminal Law; Qualified Rape; Elements of.—The elements of

Qualified Rape under these provisions are: (a) the victim is a
female over twelve (12) years but under eighteen (18) years of age;
(b) the offender is a parent, ascendant, stepparent, guardian,
relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree,
or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim; and (c) the
offender has carnal knowledge of the victim either through force,
threat, or intimidation.
Remedial Law; Evidence; Credibility of Witnesses; Factual
Findings; The factual findings of the trial court, especially on the
credibility of the rape victim, are accorded great weight and
respect and will not be disturbed on appeal.—As in the Acts of
Lasciviousness cases, the Court defers to the findings of fact of the
trial court, as affirmed by the CA. Jurisprudentially settled is the
principle that if a victim’s testimony is straightforward,
convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal
course of things, unflawed by any material or significant
inconsistency, it passes the test of credibility and the accused may
be convicted solely on the basis thereof. Putting more emphasis,
the factual findings of the trial court, especially on the credibility
of the rape victim, are accorded great weight and respect and will
not be disturbed on appeal, as in this case.
Criminal Law; Denials; Denial is inherently a weak defense
which cannot outweigh positive testimony.—It should be
emphasized that Monroyo only proffered the defense of denial,
which the courts a quo, found to be too shallow and insignificant
so as to impel BBB to falsely charge her uncle and publicly
disclose that she was raped. Case law edifies that “[d]enial cannot
prevail over [a] private complainant’s direct, positive and
categorical assertion that rings with truth. Denial is inherently a
weak defense which cannot outweigh positive testimony. As
between a categorical statement that has the earmarks of truth
on the one hand and bare denial, on the other, the former is
generally held to prevail.”

APPEAL from a decision of the Court of Appeals.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
   The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.

 
 

4 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

420

420 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo

   Public Attorney’s Office for accused-appellant.

PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:
 
Before the Court is an ordinary appeal1 filed by accused-
appellant Norieto Monroyo y Mahaguay (Monroyo)
assailing the Decision2 dated May 27, 2015 of the Court of
Appeals (CA) in C.A.-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 06078, which
affirmed the Joint Decision3 in Crim. Case Nos. C-04-7785,
C-04-7786 and C-04-7787 and the Decision4 in Crim. Case
No. C-04-7788 both dated November 16, 2011 of the
Regional Trial Court of Oriental Mindoro, Branch 40
(RTC), finding Monroyo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
three (3) counts of Acts of Lasciviousness and one (1) count
of Rape under the Revised Penal Code (RPC), as amended
by Republic Act No. (RA) 8353,5 otherwise known as “The
Anti-Rape Law of 1997.”
 
The Facts
 
On October 13, 2004, four (4) Informations were filed
before the RTC, charging Monroyo of the crimes of Acts of
Lasciviousness against AAA6 and Qualified Rape against
her sister, BBB, viz.:

_______________

1  See Notice of Appeal dated June 11, 2015; Rollo, pp. 16-17.
2   Id., at pp. 2-15. Penned by Associate Justice Samuel H. Gaerlan,
with Associate Justices Normandie B. Pizarro and Zenaida T. Galapate-
Laguilles, concurring.
3  CA Rollo, pp. 49-57. Penned by Judge Tomas C. Leynes.
4  Id., at pp. 58-67.
5  Defined and penalized under Article 266-A in relation to 266-B of the
RPC, as amended by RA 8353, entitled “AN ACT EXPANDING THE
DEFINITION OF THE CRIME OF RAPE, RECLASSIFYING THE SAME AS A CRIME
AGAINST PERSONS, AMENDING FOR THE PURPOSE ACT NO. 3815, AS
AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE REVISED PENAL CODE, AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES,” approved on September 30, 1997.
6  The identity of the victim or any information which could establish or
compromise her identity, as well as those of her immediate

5 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

 
 
420

420 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo

Criminal Case No. C-04-7787 (Acts of Lasciviousness)

 
That on or about 24 August, 2003, at around 11:30 o’clock in
the morning, in the dwelling of complainant AAA located at
Barangay San Isidro, Municipality of Victoria, Province of
Oriental Mindoro, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above named accused, actuated by lust and
lewd desire, with force and intimidation, did and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously, commit acts of lasciviousness on AAA,
a fourteen (14) year-old-virgin, by then and there touching her
private parts, against her will and without her consent, [an] act
which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and
dignity of the said AAA, to her damage and prejudice.
Contrary to law.7
 
Criminal Case No. C-04-7786 (Acts of
Lasciviousness)
 
That on or about 15 October, 2003, at around 10:30 o’clock in
the morning, at Barangay San Isidro, Municipality of Victoria,
Province of Oriental Mindoro, Philippines, and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above named accused,
actuated by lust and

_______________

family or household members, shall be withheld pursuant to RA 7610,

entitled “An Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection
Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination, and for Other
Purposes,” approved on June 17, 1992; RA 9262, entitled “An Act Defining
Violence Against Women and their Children, Providing for Protective
Measures for Victims, Prescribing Penalties Therefor, and for Other
Purposes,” approved on March 8, 2004; and Section 40 of A.M. No.
04-10-11-SC, known as the “RE: Rule on Violence Against Women and
their Children,” effective November 15, 2004 (See footnote 4 in People v.
Cadano, Jr., 729 Phil. 576, 578; 719 SCRA 234, 237 [2014], citing People v.
Lomaque, 710 Phil. 338, 342; 697 SCRA 383, 389 [2013]).
7  Rollo, p. 3.

6 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

 
422

422 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo

lewd desire, with force and intimidation, did and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously, commit acts of lasciviousness on AAA,
a fourteen (14) year-old-virgin, by then and there touching her
private parts, against her will and without her consent, [an] act
which debases, degrades or demeans the intrinsic worth and
dignity of the said AAA, to her damage and prejudice.
Contrary to law.8
 
Criminal Case No. C-04-7785 (Acts of
Lasciviousness)
 
That on or about 13 October 2003, at around 3:00 o’clock in the
afternoon, in the dwelling of complainant AAA located at
Barangay San Isidro, Municipality of Victoria, Province of
Oriental Mindoro, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above named accused, actuated by lust and
lewd desire, with force and intimidation, did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and [feloniously], commit acts of
lasciviousness on AAA, a fourteen (14) year-old-virgin, by then
and there touching her private parts, against her will and without
her consent, [an] act which debases, degrades or demeans the
intrinsic worth and dignity of the said AAA, to her damage and
prejudice.
Contrary to law.9
 
Criminal Case No. C-04-7788 (Rape)
 
That on or about November 18, 2003, at around 11:00 o’clock in
the evening, in the dwelling of complainant BBB,10 located at
Barangay San Isidro, Municipality of Victoria, Province of
Oriental Mindoro, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above named accused, motivated by lust and
lewd desire

_______________

8   Id.
9   Id., at pp. 3-4.
10  Id., at p. 4.

7 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

 
423

VOL. 828, JUNE 28, 2017 423

People vs. Monroyo

and by means of force and intimidation, willfully, unlawfully and

feloniously have carnal knowledge of one BBB, a sixteen (16) year-
old-virgin, against the will and without the consent of said private
complainant, thereby violating her person and chastity, [an] act of
sexual abuse which debase[s], degrade[s] and demean[s] her
intrinsic worth and dignity as a human being, to the damage and
prejudice of said private complainant.
In the commission of the offense the qualifying circumstance of
relationship is attendant, the accused being a relative of the
complainant by affinity within the 3rd civil degree and the
complainant being then under eighteen years of age.
Contrary to law.11

 
On the charges of Acts of Lasciviousness, the
prosecution alleged that at around 11:30 in the morning of
August 24, 2003, AAA was alone in her house when her
uncle, Monroyo, arrived. While AAA was cleaning the
house, Monroyo approached her, touched her private organ,
and warned her against telling her parents about what
happened.12
The incident was repeated on October 13, 2003, at
around 3 o’clock in the afternoon, when Monroyo went to
AAA’s house to ask for cigarette sticks. AAA went out to
buy the cigarette sticks, handed them to Monroyo, and
went to the living room to resume cleaning the house.
Monroyo followed her to the living room and once more,
touched her private organ.13
Finally, at around 10:30 in the morning of October 15,
2003, AAA went to Monroyo’s house looking for her cousin,
Norton, but the latter was not at home. When she was
about to leave, Monroyo touched her private organ.14

_______________

11  Id.
12  Id., at p. 5.
13  Id.
14  Id.

8 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

 
424

424 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo

On the charge of Rape, the prosecution claimed that on

the night of November 18, 2003, BBB, a sixteen (16) year-
old-girl, slept on a bed with her siblings, AAA and EEE. At
around 11 o’clock in the evening, BBB woke up when she
felt someone touching her breast. She saw Monroyo, the
husband of her mother’s half-sister,15 sitting on the floor
beside their bed. Her uncle instructed her to sit down on
the floor and told her not to make any noise. He then forced
her to lie down on the floor and started kissing her all over
her body while BBB cried. He forcibly removed her shorts
and panty and thereafter stood up to remove his shorts and
brief. He then placed himself on top of her, inserted his
penis into her private organ, and made a push and pull
motion. BBB cried loudly but Monroyo covered her mouth
with his hand. After satisfying his lust, he put on his
clothes and threatened to kill BBB and her family if she
tells anyone about what happened. BBB did not see him
again after the incident.16
In March 2004, BBB mustered enough courage to tell
her mother about the incident when the latter saw her
crying. BBB subjected herself to a medical examination
administered by Municipal Health Officer Dr. Ma. Virginia
R. Valdez (Dr. Valdez), who found healed hymenal
lacerations that could have been caused by a hard object,
like an erect penis.17
For his part, Monroyo denied the accusations against
him and testified that on October 15, 2003, AAA and BBB
asked for money from him to buy junk food while he was
buying cigarettes from a store. When he refused to give
them money, they grabbed the belt bag tied around his belt.
Monroyo tried to retrieve the bag by tickling them on the
side of their bodies but the bag was ripped in the process.
Monroyo slapped AAA and BBB for destroying the bag and
then he went home. He claimed that he does not know why
the cases were filed

_______________

15  See CA Rollo, p. 61.

16  See Rollo, p. 6.

9 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

17  Id., at pp. 6-7.

 
 
425

VOL. 828, JUNE 28, 2017 425

People vs. Monroyo

against him by complainants but speculated that it was

probably because of a familial tiff with the latter’s father
regarding the house that he and his wife were residing in.18
 
The RTC’s Ruling
 
In a Joint Decision19 dated November 16, 2011, the RTC
found Monroyo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of three (3)
counts of Acts of Lasciviousness (Crim. Case Nos.
C-04-7785, C-04-7786 and C-04-7787) and accordingly,
sentenced him to suffer in each case the penalty of two (2)
months and one (1) day of arresto mayor in its medium
period, as minimum to four (4) years and two (2) months of
prisión correccional in its medium period, as maximum,
and ordered him to pay P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, as
well as P25,000.00 as moral and exemplary damages.20
The RTC gave more credence to AAA’s testimony clearly
and convincingly narrating the details of each lascivious
conduct committed by Monroyo against her. It added that
AAA had no ill motive against Monroyo, while the latter’s
excuses were too shallow and insignificant for AAA to
concoct a story that she was molested.21
In another Decision22 dated November 16, 2011, the
RTC similarly found Monroyo guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crime of Rape (Crim. Case No. C-04-7788), and
accordingly, imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua, and
ordered him to pay BBB P100,000.00 as civil indemnity,
P50,000.00 as moral damages, and P50,000.00 as
exemplary damages.23

_______________

18  See CA Rollo, pp. 62-63.

19  Id., at pp. 49-57.
20  Id., at p. 57.
21  Id., at p. 56.
22  Id., at pp. 58-67.

10 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

23  Id., at pp. 66-67.

 
 
426

426 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo

The RTC gave full faith and credence to BBB’s

testimony, as she was likewise able to narrate the details of
how Monroyo raped her inside their house, noting further
that her youth and immaturity are generally badges of
truth. The foregoing account was corroborated by the
medical certificate issued by the physician who examined
BBB (i.e., Dr. Valdez) that confirmed the latter’s hymenal
lacerations, which could have been caused by a hard object,
like an erect penis. On the other hand, Monroyo merely
interposed the defense of bare denial, which cannot be
given greater weight than the positive declaration of a
credible witness like BBB. The RTC however, did not
consider the special qualifying circumstances of
relationship and minority because these were not
purportedly alleged in the Information.24
Dissatisfied, Monroyo elevated his case to the CA.
 
The CA’s Ruling
 
In a Decision25 dated May 27, 2015, the CA affirmed the
RTC’s ruling, observing that the trial court’s findings as to
the credibility of the witnesses and their testimonies
deserve the highest respect absent any showing that it
overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied material facts or
circumstances.26 The CA added that the minor
inconsistencies in AAA and BBB’s testimonies do not refer
to the essential elements of the crimes; thus, they are not
grounds to reverse the conviction.27 Notably, the CA no
longer discussed the attendant circumstances of
relationship and minority in the Rape case.
Aggrieved by his impending conviction, Monroyo filed
the present appeal.28

_______________

24  Id., at pp. 65-66.

25  Rollo, pp. 2-15.

11 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

26  Id., at p. 9.
27  Id.
28  See Notice of Appeal dated June 11, 2015; id., at pp. 16-17.

 
 
427

VOL. 828, JUNE 28, 2017 427

People vs. Monroyo

The Issue Before the Court

 
The main issue for the Court’s resolution is whether or
not Monroyo’s conviction for three (3) counts of Acts of
Lasciviousness and one (1) count of Rape should be upheld.
 
The Court’s Ruling
 
The appeal is bereft of merit.
The Court first examines the charges of Acts of
Lasciviousness against Monroyo in Crim. Case Nos.
C-04-7785, C-04-7786 and C-04-7787, committed against
AAA.
Preliminarily, although the three Informations
designated the crime committed only as “Acts of
Lasciviousness,” the facts alleged therein pertain not only
to violations of Article 336 of the RPC but also of Section
5(b) of RA 7610, otherwise known as the “Special Protection
of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination Act.” It is settled that a designation in the
information of the specific statute violated is imperative to
avoid surprise on the accused and to afford him the
opportunity to prepare his defense.29 Nevertheless, the
erroneous reference to the law violated does not vitiate the
information if the facts alleged therein clearly recite the
facts constituting the crime charged.30 As the Court had
ruled, the real nature of the criminal charge is determined
not from the caption or preamble of the information, or
from the specification of the legal provision alleged to have
been violated, which are mere conclusions of law, but by
the actual recital of facts in the information.31 In the
present case, the recital of facts in the Informations
constitute violations of Acts of Lascivious-

_______________

12 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

29  Malto v. People, 560 Phil. 119, 135; 533 SCRA 643, 657 (2007).
30  Id., at pp. 135-136; p. 657.
31  People v. Valdez, 679 Phil. 279, 293-294; 663 SCRA 272, 286-287
(2012).

 
 
428

428 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo

ness under Article 336 of the RPC in relation to Section

5(b) of RA 7610.
Article 336 of the RPC provides:

Article 336. Acts of Lasciviousness.—Any person who shall

commit any act of lasciviousness upon other persons of either sex,
under any of the circumstances mentioned in the preceding
article, shall be punished by prisión correccional.

 
Its elements are: (1) that the offender commits any act of
lasciviousness or lewdness; (2) that it is done (a) by using
force or intimidation, or (b) when the offended party is
deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or (c) when
the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age; and (3)
that the offended party is another person of either sex.32
On the other hand, Section 5(b) of RA 7610 states:

Section 5. Child Prostitution and Other Sexual

Abuse.—x x x
The penalty of reclusion temporal in its medium period
to reclusion perpetua shall be imposed upon the following:
x x x x
(b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious
conduct with a child exploited in prostitution or subject to other
sexual abuse; x x x
x x x x (Emphasis supplied)

 
The elements under Section 5(b) of RA 7610 are: (1) the
accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious
conduct; (2) the said act is performed with a child exploited
in

_______________

13 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

32   Amployo v. People, 496 Phil. 747, 755; 457 SCRA 282, 291-292
(2005). Citation omitted.

 
 
429

VOL. 828, JUNE 28, 2017 429

People vs. Monroyo

prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse; and (3) the

child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age.33 In
Quimvel v. People,34 the Court held that the allegation of
“force and intimidation” is sufficient to classify the minor
victim as one who is “exploited in prostitution or subjected
to other sexual abuse.”35
Common to both legal provisions is the element of
lascivious conduct or lewdness. The term “lewd” is
commonly defined as something indecent or obscene. It is
characterized by or intended to excite crude sexual desire.
That an accused is entertaining a lewd or unchaste design
is a mental process that can be inferred by overt acts
carrying out such intention, i.e., by conduct that can only be
interpreted as lewd or lascivious.36
In this case, the Court agrees with the findings of the
RTC, as affirmed by the CA, that the prosecution was able
to establish the presence of the aforementioned elements.
As correctly observed by the lower courts, AAA clearly and
convincingly narrated in detail each lascivious act
committed by Monroyo against her. On various occasions,
i.e., August 24, October 13 and 15, 2003, Monroyo
succeeded in touching the latter’s private organ. The Court
finds that Monroyo’s overt acts were done against AAA’s
will and much more, committed without any other
justifiable reason, hence, demonstrating its lewd character.
AAA also sufficiently established that she was a minor
during that time. In this relation, it should be pointed out
that Monroyo was AAA’s uncle and thus, exercised moral
ascendancy and influence over her, which according to case
law, constitutes intimidation.37

_______________

33  Imbo v. People, G.R. No. 197712, April 20, 2015, 756 SCRA 196, 205.
34  G.R. No. 214497, April 18, 2017, 823 SCRA 192.
35  Id.

14 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

36  Supra note 32 at p. 756; p. 292. Citations omitted.

37  People v. Magbanua, 576 Phil. 642, 648; 553 SCRA 698, 705 (2008).

 
 
430

430 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo

Verily, AAA’s testimony is worthy of full faith and

credence as there is no proof that she was motivated to
falsely accuse Monroyo of the crimes charged. To this, it
may not be amiss to state that in several cases, the Court
has observed that no young and decent girl (like AAA in
this case) would fabricate a story of sexual abuse, subject
herself to undergo public trial, with concomitant ridicule
and humiliation, if she is not impelled by a sincere desire to
put behind bars the person who assaulted her.38
Ultimately, the credibility of AAA’s testimony, as well as
Monroyo’s opposite account involves findings of fact which
the Court does not generally review. Case law dictates that
factual findings of the trial court, particularly when
affirmed by the CA, are binding on the Court barring
arbitrariness and oversight of some fact or circumstance of
weight and substance,39 of which there are none in this
case.
In view of the foregoing, Monroyo’s conviction for three
(3) counts of Acts of Lasciviousness is proper under Article
336 of the RPC in relation to Section 5(b) of RA 7610.
Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law,40 Monroyo is
hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment
with an indeterminate period of fourteen (14) years and
eight (8) months of reclusion temporal, as minimum, to
twenty (20) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum.41
Furthermore, in order to conform with

_______________

38  Supra note 32 at p. 757; p. 293. Citation omitted.

39  Id. Citation omitted.
40  Act No. 4103, entitled “AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR AN INDETERMINATE
SENTENCE AND PAROLE FOR ALL PERSONS CONVICTED OF CERTAIN CRIMES
BY THE COURTS OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS; TO CREATE A BOARD OF
INDETERMINATE SENTENCE AND TO PROVIDE FUNDS THEREFOR; AND FOR
OTHER PURPOSES,” approved on December 5, 1933. This Act was later

15 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

amended by RA 4203, entitled “AN ACT TO AMEND SECTIONS THREE AND

FOUR OF ACT NUMBERED FOUR THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED AND THREE, AS
AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE LAW,”
which was approved on June 19, 1965.
41   People v. Leonardo, 638 Phil. 161, 198-199; 624 SCRA 166, 203
(2010).

 
 
431

VOL. 828, JUNE 28, 2017 431

People vs. Monroyo

prevailing jurisprudence,42 his civil liabilities are adjusted,

in that he is ordered to pay the amounts of P20,000.00 as
civil indemnity, P30,000.00 as moral damages, and
P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, also for each count.
Separately, Monroyo was charged with the crime of
Qualified Rape in Crim. Case No. C-04-7788, this time
committed against AAA’s sister, BBB. At the outset, it
should be clarified that, contrary to the RTC’s observation,
the qualifying circumstances of minority and relationship
were sufficiently alleged in the Information in Crim. Case
No. C-04-7788, the pertinent portion of which reads:

In the commission of the offense the qualifying circumstance of

relationship is attendant, the accused being a relative of the
complainant by affinity within the 3rd civil degree and the
complainant being then under eighteen years of age.43
(Emphases supplied)

 
The presence of these circumstances is readily verifiable
from the records of this case. As to BBB’s minority (i.e.,
sixteen years old at the time the crime was committed), the
prosecution formally offered a photocopy of her birth
certificate, the authenticity of which was not in any way
disputed by the defense.44 Meanwhile, the fact that
Monroyo is BBB’s relative by affinity within the third civil
degree was attested to by BBB, who testified that Monroyo
is the husband of her mother’s half-sister.45 In fact,
Monroyo admitted their rela-

_______________

42  See People v. Bandril, G.R. No. 212205, July 6, 2015, 761 SCRA

16 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

665, 677, citing People v. Dominguez, Jr., 650 Phil. 492, 523-524; 636
SCRA 134, 163-164 (2010).
43  Rollo, p. 4.
44  In People v. Villanueva (549 Phil. 747, 765-766; 521 SCRA 236, 252
[2007]), the Court held that since a birth certificate is a public record in
the custody of the local civil registrar, its photocopy is admissible as
secondary evidence to prove its contents if the opponent fails to dispute
them.
45  See CA Rollo, p. 61.

 
 
432

432 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo

tionship on cross-examination, stating that “his wife is the

sister of the mother of [BBB].”46
Well-settled is the rule that an appeal in a criminal case
opens the entire case for scrutiny on any question, even one
not raised by the parties as errors,47 and that the appeal
confers the appellate court with full jurisdiction over the
case, enabling the court to examine records, revise the
judgment appealed from, increase the penalty, and cite the
proper provision of the penal law.48 Thus, given that the
circumstances of minority and relationship were alleged
and proven in this case, the Court examines Monroyo’s
criminal liability for Qualified Rape as charged.
Article 266-A(1)(a), in relation to Article 266-B of the
RPC, as amended by RA 8353, defines and penalizes the
crime of Rape, including the circumstances which qualify
the penalty to be imposed:

Article 266-A. Rape, When and How Committed.—Rape is

committed —
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman
under any of the following circumstances:
a) Through force, threat or intimidation.
x x x x
Article 266-B. Penalties.—Rape under paragraph 1 of the
next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.
x x x x

_______________

46  Id., at p. 63.

17 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

47  People v. Mirandilla, Jr., 670 Phil. 397, 415; 654 SCRA 761, 774
(2011), citing People v. Madsali, 625 Phil. 431, 451; 611 SCRA 596,
613-614 (2010).
48  People v. Comboy, G.R. No. 218399, March 2, 2016, 785 SCRA 512,
citing Manansala v. People, G.R. No. 215424, December 9, 2015, 777
SCRA 563, 569.

 
 
433

VOL. 828, JUNE 28, 2017 433

People vs. Monroyo

The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is

committed with any of the following aggravating/qualifying
circumstances:
1) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age
and the offender is a parent, ascendant, stepparent, guardian,
relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil
degree, or the common law spouse of the parent of the victim.
x x x x (Emphases supplied)

 
The elements of Qualified Rape under these provisions
are: (a) the victim is a female over twelve (12) years but
under eighteen (18) years of age; (b) the offender is a
parent, ascendant, stepparent, guardian, relative by
consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or
the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim; and (c)
the offender has carnal knowledge of the victim either
through force, threat, or intimidation.49
A perusal of the records reveals that all these elements
are present. Both the RTC and the CA found credible BBB’s
categorical testimony that on November 18, 2003, Monroyo
had carnal knowledge of her without her consent; that she
was sixteen (16) years old at that time; and that Monroyo is
her uncle, being the husband of her mother’s half-sister. In
addition, the results of Dr. Valdez’s medical examination
corroborated BBB’s account. The lower courts also noted
BBB’s testimony that Monroyo previously molested her five
(5) times prior to the rape incident but she opted not to
inform her parents due to Monroyo’s threats against her.50
As in the Acts of Lasciviousness cases, the Court defers
to the findings of fact of the trial court, as affirmed by the
CA. Jurisprudentially settled is the principle that if a
victim’s

18 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

_______________

49   People v. Balcueva, 762 Phil. 730, 736; 761 SCRA 489, 494-495
(2015).
50  CA Rollo, p. 65.

 
 
434

434 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo

testimony is straightforward, convincing and consistent

with human nature and the normal course of things,
unflawed by any material or significant inconsistency, it
passes the test of credibility and the accused may be
convicted solely on the basis thereof. Putting more
emphasis, the factual findings of the trial court, especially
on the credibility of the rape victim, are accorded great
weight and respect and will not be disturbed on appeal,51
as in this case.
At this juncture, it should be emphasized that Monroyo
only proffered the defense of denial, which the courts a quo,
found to be too shallow and insignificant so as to impel
BBB to falsely charge her uncle and publicly disclose that
she was raped. Case law edifies that “[d]enial cannot
prevail over [a] private complainant’s direct, positive and
categorical assertion that rings with truth. Denial is
inherently a weak defense which cannot outweigh positive
testimony. As between a categorical statement that has the
earmarks of truth on the one hand and bare denial, on the
other, the former is generally held to prevail.”52
Based on the foregoing, Monroyo’s criminal liability in
Crim. Case No. C-04-7788 is thus upheld. However, for the
reasons initially stated, his conviction is modified from
Rape to Qualified Rape, which, based on Article 266-B of
the RPC, as amended by RA 8353, is penalized with death.
Pursuant to RA 9346,53 courts shall impose the penalty of
reclusion perpetua in lieu of the death penalty and the
offender shall not be eligible for parole. As for his civil
liability, jurisprudence states that when death is the
imposable penalty for the crime committed but it cannot be
imposed due to RA 9346, the

_______________

19 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

51  People v. Lumaho, 744 Phil. 233, 243-244; 736 SCRA 542, 552-553
(2014).
52   People v. Bitancor, 441 Phil. 758, 769; 393 SCRA 440, 447-448
(2002). Citation omitted.
53  Entitled “AN ACT PROHIBITING THE IMPOSITION OF DEATH PENALTY
IN THE PHILIPPINES,” approved on June 24, 2006.

 
 
435

VOL. 828, JUNE 28, 2017 435

People vs. Monroyo

Court shall award the following to BBB: (a) P100,000.00 as

civil indemnity; (b) P100,000.00 as moral damages; and (c)
P100,000.00 as exemplary damages.54
Finally, the Court imposes interest at the rate of six
percent (6%) per annum on all monetary awards from the
date of finality of judgment until fully paid, for each count
of Acts of Lasciviousness and Qualified Rape.55
WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED. The Decision
dated May 27, 2015 of the Court of Appeals in C.A.-G.R.
CR-H.C. No. 06078 is hereby AFFIRMED with
MODIFICATIONS, finding accused-appellant Norieto
Monroyo y Mahaguay GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of
three (3) counts of Acts of Lasciviousness and one (1) count
of Qualified Rape. Accordingly:
(a) In Criminal Case Nos. C-04-7785, C-04-7786,
C-04-7787, Monroyo is SENTENCED to suffer the
penalty of imprisonment with an indeterminate
period of fourteen (14) years and eight (8) months of
reclusion temporal, as minimum, to twenty (20) years
of reclusion temporal, as maximum, for each count
and is ORDERED to pay AAA the amounts of
P20,000.00 as civil indemnity, P30,000.00 as moral
damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, also
for each count;
(b) In Criminal Case No. C-04-7788, Monroyo is
SENTENCED to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua, without eligibility for parole, and is
ORDERED to pay BBB the amounts of P100,000.00
as civil indemnity, P100,000.00 as moral damages,
and P100,000.00 as exemplary damages; and

_______________

20 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED 828 file:///C:/Users/SUE/Desktop/828 SCRA 416_files/saved_resource.html

54  People v. Jugueta, G.R. No. 202124, April 5, 2016, 788 SCRA 331,
377.
55  Id., at p. 388.

 
 
436

436 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Monroyo

(c) All monetary awards shall earn interest at the

rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of
finality of judgment until fully paid.
SO ORDERED.

Sereno (CJ., Chairperson), Leonardo-De Castro, Del

Castillo and Caguioa,** JJ., concur.

Appeal denied, judgment affirmed with modifications.

Notes.—There is a need to specifically allege in the

information (1) the age of the victim, and (2) the
relationship of the victim to the offender. (People vs.
Salvador, 797 SCRA 712 [2016])
The minority of a victim of tender age who may be below
the age of ten (10) is quite manifest and the court can take
judicial notice thereof. (People vs. Bolo, 800 SCRA 276
[2016])
 
——o0o——

© Copyright 2019 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

21 of 21 09/08/2019, 10:00 am