EN BANC

[G.R. No. 167179. January 28, 2008.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , plaintiff-appellee, vs . ELMER CEREDON

y PAGARAN , accused-appellant.

DECISION

REYES , R.T. , J : p

Sa mga karumal-dumal na krimen, walang higit na nagpapasiklab ng

galit, pagkarimarim at pagkapoot kaysa sa panghahalay sa sariling laman. Ito
ay kasuklam-suklam at nakapandidiri na marapat lamang na maramdaman ng
nagkasala ang galit at pagtatakwil sa kanya ng lipunan. Sa pagkaka- repeal ng
Death Penalty Law noong June 24, 2006 sa pamamagitan ng Republic Act
(R.A.) No. 9346 , ang akusadong umaapela ay sampung ulit na hinahatulan ng
reclusion perpetua. Sa piitan na lilipas ang kanyang mga araw kasama ang
umuusig na gunita ng pagkakasala sa kanyang batang-batang kapatid.
AMONG the heinous crimes, none stirs up so much public outrage, repulsion and
hatred than incestuous rape. It is so odious and disgusting that the perpetrator
rightfully must feel the anger and spurn of society. 1 With the repeal of the Death
Penalty Law 2 on June 24, 2006 through the passage of R.A. No. 9347, 3 accused-
appellant is sentenced ten times to reclusion perpetua. He is to live out his days under
incarceration with thoughts of his crimes against his sister of tender age to haunt his
conscience.
The Case
Appellant Elmer Ceredon y Pagaran was indicted for ten (10) counts of rape,
de ned and penalized under Article 266 (A) and (B) of the Revised Penal Code, as
amended by R.A. No. 8353 and R.A. No. 7659, allegedly committed as follows:
1. In Criminal Case No. 08-1296:
That sometime in 1995, in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused armed with a knife, with lewd design, by use of force or intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the
herein offended party, AAA, 4 his youngest sister, a minor, ten (10) years of age,
all against her will and consent. dctai

CONTRARY TO LAW. 5

2. In Criminal Case No. 08-1297:

That sometime in 1995, in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused armed with a knife, with lewd design, by use of force or intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the
herein offended party, AAA, his youngest sister, a minor, ten (10) years of age, all
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 against her will and consent.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 6

3. In Criminal Case No. 08-1298:

That sometime in 1995, in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused armed with a knife, with lewd design, by use of force or intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the
herein offended party, AAA, his youngest sister, a minor, ten (10) years of age, all
against her will and consent.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 7

4. In Criminal Case No. 08-1299:

That sometime in 1995, in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused armed with a knife, with lewd design, by use of force or intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the
herein offended party, AAA, his youngest sister, a minor, ten (10) years of age, all
against her will and consent.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 8

5. In Criminal Case No. 08-1300:

That sometime in 1995, in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused armed with a knife, with lewd design, by use of force or intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the
herein offended party, AAA, his youngest sister, a minor, ten (10) years of age, all
against her will and consent. AcEIHC

CONTRARY TO LAW. 9

6. In Criminal Case No. 08-1301:

That sometime in 1996, in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused armed with a knife, with lewd design, by use of force or intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the
herein offended party, AAA, his youngest sister, a minor, eleven (11) years of age,
all against her will and consent.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 1 0

7. In Criminal Case No. 08-1302:

That sometime in 1996, in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused armed with a knife, with lewd design, by use of force or intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the
herein offended party, AAA, his youngest sister, a minor, eleven (11) years of age,
all against her will and consent.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 11
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 8. In Criminal Case No. 08-1303:
That sometime in 1998, in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused armed with a knife, with lewd design, by use of force or intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the
herein offended party, AAA, his youngest sister, a minor, thirteen (13) years of age,
all against her will and consent.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 12

9. In Criminal Case No. 08-1304:

That sometime in 1998, in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused armed with a knife, with lewd design, by use of force or intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the
herein offended party, AAA, his youngest sister, a minor, thirteen (13) years of age,
all against her will and consent. cIEHAC

CONTRARY TO LAW. 13

10. In Criminal Case No. 08-1305:

That sometime in 2000, in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused armed with a knife, with lewd design, by use of force or intimidation, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the
herein offended party, AAA, his youngest sister, a minor, fteen (15) years of age,
all against her will and consent.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 14

On August 13, 2001, at his arraignment before the Regional Trial Court (RTC),
Branch 8, Aparri, Cagayan, appellant pleaded "not guilty" to all ten (10) charges.
However, on September 3, 2001, during the pre-trial conference, his counsel manifested
before the trial court the desire of appellant to change his plea to "guilty" on all ten (10)
counts. Said manifestation was granted and appellant was re-arraigned. 14-a
Thereafter, joint trial on the merits ensued. Teresa Andres-Teresa, Grade IV
teacher of private complainant AAA, and AAA herself took the witness stand for the
prosecution.
No evidence was presented for the defense.
The Facts
Criminal Case No. 08-1296
The corruption of AAA's childhood innocence commenced sometime in 1995
when she was merely ten (10) years of age. It occurred at mid-day in her own home at
Baraoidan, Gattaran, Cagayan. 15 She was playing with her brothers BBB and CCC when
appellant beckoned to her. She ignored him for fear of getting whipped. His calls
unheeded, appellant came out of the house and ordered their two brothers to go down
to the river. BBB and CCC did as they were told. 16
Holding AAA by the arms, appellant then brought her into the house. She cried
but appellant told her in Ilocano "Uki ni nam, ta bedbedak ta ngiwat mo" which roughly
translates to "Vulva of your mother, I will gag your mouth." Appellant proceeded to
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 search for a handkerchief. 17 ICTacD

AAA ran towards her youngest brother's cradle but appellant pulled her away to
another room where he gagged her and whipped her with a belt. 1 8 After that, appellant
tied her hands together behind her back with a rope, pulled her dress down, laid her on a
bed and, with more rope, tied each of her legs to separate corners of the bed. 1 9
Appellant then left the room. 2 0
When he returned, he was wielding a pair of scissors. He snipped off AAA's
shorts and underwear then shed his own clothes. Appellant then mounted her and
inserted his penis into her vagina. The penetration caused her great pain. 21 Afterwards,
appellant wiped her genital region with a handkerchief and showed it to her. It was
covered with blood. 22
Moments later, appellant heard their sister DDD's voice prompting him to procure
a towel with which to cover AAA. Having concealed her nudity in this manner, appellant
hastily donned his garments and left laughing. 23
When DDD and their brothers BBB and CCC entered the room, they found AAA
still tied to the bed. One of her brothers pulled off the towel and untied her. 24 AAA did
not tell them that appellant had raped her because of her fear of appellant and his
threats that he would kill them all. 25
Criminal Case No. 1297
The second incident of rape also occurred in 1995. 2 6 AAA was tending to their
youngest brother when appellant summoned her to extract his armpit hairs. She turned
a deaf ear. Appellant then instructed their brother BBB to take their youngest sibling to
the river to bathe him. BBB complied. 2 7 Left alone now with AAA, appellant dragged
her inside a room and ordered her to remove her clothes. 2 8 When she refused, he
forcibly undressed her at knife-point. 2 9
Stripped naked, AAA was then brought to the bed — the same bed on which
appellant had previously committed the dastardly deed. While lying on the bed,
appellant disrobed and, while poking her with his knife, mounted her. He then
penetrated her vagina with his penis. After satisfying himself, he again threatened to kill
all of them should she report the matter to anyone. 3 0
Criminal Case No. 08-1298
Later that same year, appellant raped AAA for the third time. 31 At the time of the
incident, their parents were out of the house. 32 While sleeping on top of their trunk,
AAA was awakened when appellant started undressing her. She cried and begged him
to stop, but he disregarded her pleas and proceeded to sexually abuse her. 33 Despite
her protestations, appellant proceeded to insert his penis into the young girl's vagina. 34
After his lust had been sated, he reiterated his threat to kill them all should she reveal
the incident to anyone. 35 SIAEHC

Criminal Case No. 08-1299

A few days after the third rape, AAA was again sexually abused by appellant
inside their house, in the same room and upon the same bed. As in the previous
incidents, appellant poked a knife at her to compel her to submit to his bestial urges. 36
Out of fear, she did not struggle or resist. Thereafter, appellant, had carnal knowledge
of her. 37
Criminal Case No. 08-1300

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com

 The fth rape happened in the same year. 3 8 By this time, appellant was already
married. 3 9 His bestial acts towards his own sister nonetheless continued. It was
noontime and AAA had just come home from visiting their grandfather. 4 0 When she
entered the bedroom, appellant quickly followed her in, closed the door behind him and
locked it. 4 1
Poking his knife at her, he told her to strip. When she refused, appellant forcibly
undressed her. He then removed his own clothes and laid her on the bed. 42 While
pointing a knife at her, he mounted her and inserted his penis into her vagina. 43
She pleaded with appellant to stop doing it to her by saying, "Manong kaasiandak
kadin, husto na kadin," which means "Brother, have pity on me, please stop it." Appellant,
however, just slapped her mouth and proceeded to rape her. Afterwards, he issued his
threat not to divulge the matter to anyone lest he would kill them all. 44
Criminal Case No. 08-1301
In 1996, appellant, for the sixth time, raped AAA 45 who had turned eleven (11)
years old. She was playing alone in front of their house when she saw appellant
approaching her. As she was afraid of him, she tried to run away. She stumbled,
however, and he was able to catch up with her. Appellant then dragged her inside where
he laid her on the living room oor. They were alone at home as the rest of the family
had gone to harvest rice at their kaingin. 46
Appellant proceeded to remove AAA's dress and underwear. Then, he removed
his own clothes. Subsequently, he mounted her and inserted his penis into her vagina
against her will. 47 Afterwards, he uttered the same threats to kill everyone should she
expose her defloration to anyone. 48 SCcHIE

Criminal Case No. 08-1302

The seventh occurrence of rape was also in 1996. The family had just transferred
to a new house situated at the foot of a mountain in Baraoidan, Gattaran, Cagayan. They
were forced to relocate to a new house after their old home was swept away in a ood.
49

When probed by the prosecutor as to the details of the seventh incident of rape,
AAA disclosed that she could no longer remember the exact manner how appellant
perpetrated the rape. She was, however, certain that she was twice raped in 1996 by
the same. 5 0
Criminal Case No. 08-1303
The eighth incident of rape took place in 1998 51 when AAA was thirteen (13)
years of age. She was then lying alone inside their house. Her parents, along with her
other siblings, were out working in their kaingin. 52
Suddenly, appellant appeared and moved closer to her. She tried to rise but he
pushed her back down. Appellant then forcibly removed the young girl's clothes, her
shorts and panty. He then proceeded to unbutton his pants. 53
According to her, she could not have escaped while appellant was undressing
because she feared what he might do to her. After removing his own clothes, appellant
went on top of her and commenced raping her. 54
Just as she did countless times before, AAA pleaded with appellant "Manong,
kuston kaasiannak kadin" ("Brother, enough, have pity on me"). Instead of desisting,
appellant slapped her in the mouth. After the sexual abuse, he issued the same
threatening statements to her. 55
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 Criminal Case No. 08-1304
Also in 1998, the ninth rape happened. It occurred under similar circumstances.
The rest of their family had gone to their kaingin and private complainant AAA was left
alone in their house at the foot of the mountain. 56
IDSETA

Seeing that she was left alone to tend the house, appellant again pounced on the
opportunity to impose his bestial urges on his young sister. At that time, AAA was still
thirteen (13) years old.
As in the previous offenses, appellant forced AAA to undress. After ridding
himself of his clothing, appellant mounted her fragile frame and penetrated the young
girl's vagina. 57
Criminal Case No. 08-1305
The tenth and last incident of rape transpired on May 8, 2000 5 8 during the wake
of their father who had passed away. AAA was then fteen (15) years old. It was
committed in a new house, also in Baraoidan, Gattaran, Cagayan, where they
transferred. 5 9 Appellant had his own house by then situated about ve hundred (500)
meters away. 6 0 Their father was lying in state at appellant's house. 6 1
On said date at noontime, their mother sent AAA home to feed the chickens. 62
She obeyed and went inside their house to fetch rice with which to feed them when
appellant followed and grabbed her. She resisted and kicked him in the abdomen. He
fell down and she tried to run but he was able to grab her foot causing her to stumble
and fall. 63
Thereafter, appellant removed all her clothes. He kissed her lips and breasts
several times, mounted her, then sexually violated her. 64 All the while, he was aunting
his perversion by telling his sister, "Nagimas gayam ti kabagis ko" ("I derived so much
satisfaction from my sister"). Afterwards, he issued the same previous threats to her.
65

Subsequent Events
However, on September 18, 2000, AAA reached the end of her rope.
Notwithstanding appellant's threats, she revealed to her sister DDD, friend Giselle and
teacher Teresa that she was raped by appellant, her brother. 66 Teresa, upon hearing
AAA's revelation, accompanied her to their head teacher Felix Salvador. Then, together,
they went to the barangay captain who told them to report the matter to the police. This
they did. 67
On September 20, 2000, policemen were dispatched to bring appellant to the
police station. There, a confrontation arose between AAA and appellant. Upon seeing
appellant, AAA punched him and said "Hayop ka, baboy, nirape mo ako" ("You animal,
pig, you raped me"). 68 ICcaST

On September 21, 2000, there was a second confrontation. 6 9 Present were their
mother, their sister DDD, their uncle Raymundo Bumanglag, appellant's wife Josephine,
and AAA's teachers Charito Elesterio, Jerry Roque and Elpidio Salvatierra. In said
confrontation, AAA accused her brother, appellant, of raping her ten (10) times, while he
admitted to having raped her thrice only. Josephine, appellant's wife, told him to admit
so that AAA could forgive him. 7 0 He then admitted that he had raped her ten (10) times
and asked for forgiveness, beseeching her to take pity on his family. AAA replied that
she could no longer forgive him because her heart had "already hardened like stone."
Appellant cried. 7 1
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 RTC and CA Dispositions
On January 8, 2002, the trial court rendered its decision 72 convicting appellant
on all ten counts of rape, with the following disposition:
WHEREFORE, the Court nds accused Elmer Ceredon y Pagaran "GUILTY"
beyond reasonable doubt in all the ten (10) Criminal Informations for "RAPE" and
is hereby sentence (sic) to suffer the supreme penalty of "DEATH" in each of the
ten (10) criminal informations.
SO ORDERED. 73 (Underscoring supplied)

Hence, the automatic appeal to the Supreme Court. However, on the strength of
People v. Mateo , 74 the case was forwarded to the Court of Appeals (CA) for
intermediate review.
In its Decision 75 dated January 28, 2005, the CA a rmed the judgment of the
trial court but with modification providing for damages, thus:
WHEREFORE, the judgment of conviction is AFFIRMED with the
MODIFICATION that for each count of rape the accused should pay private
complainant the amount of (1) P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; (2) P50,000.00 as
moral damages; and (3) P25,000.00 as exemplary damages.
Let the entire records of this case be elevated to the Supreme Court for
review pursuant to A.M. No. 00-5-03-SC (Amendments to the Revised Rules of
Criminal Procedure to Govern Death Penalty Cases), which took effect on October
15, 2004. HSaIDc

SO ORDERED. 76 (Underscoring supplied)

Issues
Since the O ce of the Solicitor General, on behalf of the People, and the Public
Attorney's O ce, as defense counsel to appellant, had both submitted Manifestations
in lieu of Supplemental Briefs, the Court is now faced in this review with the same
assignment of errors appellant presented before the CA, to wit:
I
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY
BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME CHARGED BASED ON AN
IMPROVIDENT PLEA OF GUILTY.
II
ASSUMING ARGUENDO THAT THERE WAS NO IMPROVIDENT PLEA OF GUILTY,
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONVICTING ACCUSED-APPELLANT IN CRIMINAL
CASES NOS. 08-1296; 08-1297; 08-1298; 08-1299; 08-1300; 08-1301; 08-1302; 08-
1303 AND 08-1304; CONSIDERING THAT THE SAID INFORMATIONS FAILED TO
SUFFICIENTLY ESTABLISH WITH PARTICULARITY THE DATES OF THE
COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE.
III
ASSUMING AGAIN THAT THERE WAS NO IMPROVIDENT PLEA OF GUILTY, THE
TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN IMPOSING THE DEATH PENALTY UPON THE
ACCUSED-APPELLANT IN CRIMINAL CASE NO. 08-1305.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 IV
ASSUMING FURTHER THAT THE PROSECUTION HAS SUFFICIENTLY ESTABLISH
(SIC) WITH PARTICULARITY THE DATE OF THE COMMISSION OF THE OFFENSE,
THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN IMPOSING THE DEATH PENALTY ON
THE ACCUSED AS THE QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE THAT THE ACCUSED IS
THE BROTHER OF THE VICTIM AND, HENCE, A RELATIVE WITHIN THE SECOND
DEGREE OF CONSANGUINITY WAS NOT PROPERLY ALLEGED . 77 (Underscoring
supplied)

Our Ruling
No Improvident Plea of Guilt
Appellant claims that the trial court based its ruling of conviction on his
"improvident plea of guilt," relying on Section 3, Rule 116 of the Rules of Court, to wit: ACIEaH

Section 3. Plea of guilty to capital offense; reception of evidence. —

When the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, the court shall conduct a
searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the
consequences of his plea and shall require the prosecution to prove his guilt and
the precise degree of culpability. The accused may present evidence in his behalf.
78

He argues that when he was re-arraigned and he pleaded "guilty" to all ten
charges of rape levelled against him, he was not fully apprised of the consequences of
his change of plea from "not guilty" to "guilty." According to him, the trial court did not
inquire as to the voluntariness of his plea and that it failed to explain fully to him that
once convicted, he would be meted the death penalty under R.A. No. 7659. Hence, he
contends, his conviction should be set aside.
We cannot agree.
The rule is where the accused desires to plead guilty to a capital offense, the
court is enjoined to observe the following:
1. It must conduct a searching inquiry into the voluntariness and full
comprehension of the consequences of his plea;
2. The court must require the prosecution to present evidence to prove the
guilt of the accused and the precise degree of his culpability; and
3. The court must ask the accused if he desires to present evidence in his
behalf and allow him to do so if he desires. 79

There is no de nite and concrete rule on how a trial judge may go about the
matter of a proper "searching inquiry" as required by the aforecited rule. It is incumbent
upon a trial judge to ascertain and be fully convinced that the plea of guilty was
voluntarily made and its consequences fully comprehended by the accused. 8 0
Records reveal that appellant was duly assisted by his counsel, both in his rst
arraignment and re-arraignment. In fact, it was his counsel who manifested before the
trial court that appellant desired to change his plea from "not guilty" to "guilty" on all ten
charges of rape filed against him by his younger sister. DCASIT

Besides being assisted by counsel all throughout the proceedings, when

appellant was re-arraigned, the charges were read and explained to him in Ilocano, his
native tongue. 81 He cannot now claim that he was unaware of the consequences of his
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 change of plea.
More than that, appellant admitted raping private complainant AAA. When
confronted by AAA, their mother, sister DDD, and their uncle Raymundo Bumanglag,
appellant readily admitted to violating his sister AAA on at least three occasions.
Sensing that AAA was only angered by his fractional admission, and through the
prodding of his wife Josephine for him to admit the whole truth, appellant confessed to
the ten counts of rape.
At any rate, contrary to appellant's assertion, he was convicted by the trial court,
not on the basis of his plea of guilty, but on the strength of the evidence adduced by the
prosecution. As consistently held by the Court, 82 while convictions based on pleas of
guilt to capital offenses have been set aside because of the improvidence of the plea,
the same holds true only when such plea is the sole basis of the judgment.
When, as in this case, the trial court relied on su cient and credible evidence to
convict the accused beyond reasonable doubt, the same must be sustained for the
simple reason that the conviction is predicated not on the guilty plea of accused but on
the convincing evidence proving his commission of the offenses charged.
Indeed, there were instances, such as in People v. Lakindanum , 83 where even
when the court found that the judge was remiss in his duty to conduct a searching
inquiry, the conviction was sustained in the interest of justice:
The Court observes that, indeed, the manner by which the trial court judge
conducted the inquiry into the voluntariness and full comprehension of the
accused-appellant's plea of guilty leaves much to be desired.
xxx xxx xxx
From the records of the proceedings in the court below, it can be gleaned
that the trial judge's manner of apprising Lakindanum of the consequences of his
plea was at best, cursory, to wit:
STaHIC

xxx xxx xxx

From the foregoing, it is clear that the judge can hardly be said to have
satis ed the requirement of conducting a searching inquiry into the voluntariness
and full comprehension by the accused of entering a guilty plea. Worse, the
judge erroneously informed Lakindanum that by pleading guilty, the
latter forfeited his right to testify and to adduce evidence in his
defense . . . . .
xxx xxx xxx
From the foregoing positive identi cation by the child victim of her rapist
and her candid narration of the circumstances surrounding the rape, it is clear
that accused-appellant was properly convicted for robbing Catherine of her
innocence and childhood. This Court cannot, on mere procedural grounds,
allow the revolting perversion of the accused-appellant to go
unpunished. 8 4 (Emphasis supplied)
Appellant's conviction must be upheld as there was no such error of accepting an
improvident plea committed by the trial court.
There can only be an improvident plea of guilt under Section 3, Rule 116 where
there is a possibility of an accused being meted out the supreme penalty of death. In
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 the words of said section, "When accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, the court
shall conduct a searching inquiry . . ., etc." The obvious rationale for this is to ascertain
that accused truly understands the dire consequences of his plea. Considering that R.A.
No. 9346 has prohibited the imposition of the death penalty, the raison d'etre behind
said rule is absent in the case at bar.
Exact dates of commission
need not be alleged.
Appellant next contends that the Informations led against him do not
sufficiently charge the offenses committed because the exact dates of commission are
not alleged. Hence, his conviction is not warranted.
The contention is without merit.
The date or time of the commission of the rape need not be alleged with
precision. It is enough for the information or complaint to state that the crime has been
committed at a time as near as possible to the date of its actual commission. Failure to
allege the exact date when the crime happened does not render the information
defective, much less void. 8 5 SETaHC

An information is valid as long as it distinctly states the elements of the offense

and the constitutive acts or omissions. The exact date of the commission of a crime is
not an essential element of it. 86 Thus, in a prosecution for rape, the material fact or
circumstance to be considered is the occurrence of the rape, not the time of its
commission. 87 The failure to specify the exact date or time when it was committed
does not ipso facto make the information defective on its face. 88
The date or time of the commission of rape is not a material ingredient of the
said crime because the gravamen of rape is carnal knowledge of a woman through
force and intimidation. In fact, the precise time when the rape takes place has no
substantial bearing on its commission. As such, the date or time need not be stated
with absolute accuracy. It is su cient that the complaint or information states that the
crime has been committed at any time as near as possible to the date of its actual
commission. 89
Besides, as succinctly explained by the trial court:
[Private-complainant] was only ten (10) years old in 1995 and about eleven
(11) years old in 1996 she being born on February 18, 1985. It is but natural for
her not to remember the dates. More so when it has a very negative, horrifying
and traumatic effect and impact on her life. 9 0

Further, it is already too late in the day for appellant to question the su ciency of
the information. He had all the time to raise this issue during the course of the trial,
particularly during his arraignment. He could have led for a bill of particulars in order
to be properly informed of the dates of the alleged rapes. However, appellant chose to
be silent and never lifted a nger to question the information. As a result, he is deemed
to have waived whatever objections he had; he cannot now be heard to seek a rmative
relief. Furthermore, objections as to matters of form in the information cannot be made
for the first time on appeal. 91
Relationship as qualifying circumstance
may be alleged in layman's terms.
Nor was there any defect in the Informations when they merely averred that the
victim was the youngest sister of appellant. We do not agree with the defense that in
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 order for relationship to qualify in this case, it must be mentioned that the victim is a
"relative within the second degree of consanguinity." ATCaDE

This is not a novel question. The same issue was addressed by the Court in
People v. Sanchez . 92 In the said case, appellant argued that he could not be meted the
death penalty for raping his sister for failure of the information to allege that said
private complainant was a "relative within the third civil degree of consanguinity."
The Court struck down appellant's argument in the following tenor:
We have held in People v. Ferolino, that:
"If the offender is merely a relation — not a parent, ascendant,
stepparent, or guardian or common law spouse of the mother of the victim
— it must be alleged in the information that he is a relative by
consanguinity or a nity (as the case may be) within the civil degree. That
relationship by consanguinity or a nity was not alleged in the
informations in these cases. Even if it was, it was still necessary to further
allege that such relationship was within the third civil degree."
The present case is not within the contemplation of said ruling considering
that in the Ferolino case, the victim is a niece of the offender while in the present
case the victim is a sister of the offender. It was deemed necessary in the Ferolino
case to require that it must be speci cally alleged in the Information that the
offender is "a relative by consanguinity or a nity (as the case may be) within the
third civil degree" because we acknowledge the fact that there are niece-uncle
relationships which are beyond the third civil degree, in which case, death penalty
cannot be imposed on an accused found guilty of rape. However, a sister-brother
relationship is obviously in the second civil degree and no other sister-brother
relationship exists in civil law that falls beyond the third civil degree.
Consequently, it is not necessary in this case that the Information should
speci cally state that the appellant is a relative by consanguinity within the third
civil degree of the victim. This is an exception to the requirement enunciated in
the Ferolino case. 9 3

Further, what is required by the Rules is that "the acts or omissions complained
of as constituting the offense and the qualifying and aggravating circumstances must
be stated in ordinary and concise language and not necessarily in the language used in
the statute but in terms su cient to enable a person of common understanding to
know what offense is being charged as well as its qualifying and aggravating
circumstances and for the court to pronounce judgment." 94 Perusing the ten (10)
Informations for rape, private complainant AAA was categorically identi ed as
appellant's younger sister. Verily, the requirement of allegation as to relationship was
more than satisfied.
Testimony of AAA as to her own
age is sufficient evidence.
Appellant argues that in Criminal Case No. 08-1305, no evidence was presented
as to the age of the victim, AAA. This is false. On the issue of age of the victim, it is
enough that the victim testi ed on her age vis-a-vis the time she was raped by
appellant.
In People v. Pruna , 95 the Court set out guidelines as to the appreciation of age,
either as an element of the crime or as a qualifying circumstance. In that case, the rule
was laid out, once and for all, that although the best evidence to prove the age of the
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 offended party is an original or certi ed true copy of the certi cate of live birth of such
party, its presentation into evidence is not a sine qua non requirement to prove her age
for the appreciation of minority, either as an element of the crime or as a qualifying
circumstance. The decision goes on to state that in the absence of (a) certi cate of live
birth, (b) authentic document, or (c) testimony of the victim's mother or relatives
concerning the victim's age, complainant's testimony will su ce provided that it is
expressly and clearly admitted by the accused. EcTIDA

In the case at bar, private complainant categorically disclosed that she was only
ten (10) years old at the time of the rst rape in 1995 96 and fteen (15) years of age
when she was last raped by appellant. 97 Appellant Ceredon admitted these in a
confrontation between him and private complainant, witnessed by their mother and
other relatives. 98
More than that, not only did the defense fail to object to complainant's claim to
minority when it was consistently bared during the trial; the accused, through his plea of
guilt, admitted to the victim's age as alleged in the informations against him. 9 9
Furthermore, appellant cannot claim ignorance of the age of the victim as she is his
own sister. 1 0 0
Anent the Pruna requirement that the court make a categorical nding as to age,
the RTC had this to say: 101
True, AAA was not able to tell the exact month and date of the rst nine
incidents but this is not fatal to her credibility. She is only about ten (10) years old
in 1995 and about eleven (11) years old in 1996, she being born on February 18,
1985 and therefore it is but natural for her not to remember the dates more so
when it has a very negative, horrifying and traumatic effect and impact on her life.
(Underscoring supplied)

Death penalty repeal and damages

In order that the rape be quali ed, there need only be one qualifying
circumstance present. Here, We have two — relationship and age. Even
assuming that the circumstance of age had not been duly proven, it makes no
difference as to the nal outcome of this case as the circumstance of
relationship of appellant to the victim cannot be denied.
As the death penalty has been repealed through R.A. No. 9346, 102 entitled "An
Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines," appellant's sentence
should be downgraded from death to reclusion perpetua. Section 2 of the said law
pertinently provides:
Section 2. In lieu of the death penalty, the following shall be imposed:

(a) the penalty of reclusion perpetua, when the law violated makes use of the
nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code; or
(b) the penalty of life imprisonment, when the law violated does not make use
of the nomenclature of the penalties of the Revised Penal Code. CIcTAE

Notwithstanding the reduction of the penalty imposed on appellant, he is not

eligible for parole following Section 3 of the law, which reads:
Section 3. Persons convicted of offenses punished with reclusion
perpetua, or whose sentences will be reduced to reclusion perpetua, by reason of
this Act, shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. 4103, otherwise known as
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended.

Anent the CA award of damages, civil indemnity in the amount of P75,000.00 is

correct as each count of rape is quali ed by circumstances which warrant the
imposition of the death penalty. 1 0 3 With respect to moral damages, the awarded
amount of P50,000.00 must be increased to P75,000.00, without need of pleading or
proof of basis. 1 0 4 The additional amount of P25,000.00 as exemplary damages to AAA
is likewise justi ed due to the presence of the qualifying circumstances of minority and
relationship. 1 0 5
WHEREFORE, the Court of Appeals judgment of conviction is AFFIRMED with the
MODIFICATION that the penalty imposed in each case is hereby changed from death to
reclusion perpetua, without eligibility for parole. Further, the award of moral damages
to AAA in the amount of P50,000.00 is increased to P75,000.00.
SO ORDERED.
Puno, C.J., Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-
Martinez, Corona, Carpio-Morales, Azcuna, Tinga and Leonardo-de Castro, JJ., concur.
Velasco, Jr., J., is on official leave.
Chico-Nazario and Nachura, JJ., took no part.

Footnotes

1. People v. Lima, G.R. No. 128289, April 23, 2002, 381 SCRA 471.
2. Republic Act No. 7659.

3. An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty in the Philippines.

4. Rule on Violence Against Women and their Children, Sec. 40; Rules and Regulations
Implementing Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children
Act of 2004), Rule XI, Sec. 63. The real name of the rape victim will not be disclosed. Her
personal circumstances or any other information tending to establish or compromise her
identity will likewise be withheld. We will instead use fictitious initials to represent her
throughout the decision. (People v. Cabalquinto, G.R. No. 167693, September 19, 2006,
502 SCRA 419, 421-426)
5. CA rollo, p. 4.

6. Id. at 5.
7. Id. at 6.
8. Id. at 7.
9. Id. at 8.
10. Id. at 9. IESAac

11. Id. at 10.

12. Id. at 11.
13. Id. at 12.
14. Id. at 13.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 14-a Upon re-arraignment, after all the ten criminal informations were each read in Ilocano,
the dialect which the accused speaks and understands, actively assisted by his
counsel-de-oficio, Atty. Simplicio Sosa, Jr., accused Elmer Ceredon y Pagaran pleaded
"GUILTY" in each of the ten (10) informations. (Id. at 21; records, p. 60)
15. TSN, October 11, 2001, p. 3.

16. Id. at 4.
17. Id. at 5.
18. Id. at 5-6.
19. Id. at 6.
20. Id. at 7.
21. Id.
22. Id. at 8.
23. Id.
24. Id.
25. Id. at 9.
26. Id. at 10.
27. Id. at 10-11.
28. Id. at 11.
29. Id. at 12.
30. Id. at 12-13. DHEaTS

31. Id. at 13.

32. Id. at 15.
33. Id. at 14.
34. Id.
35. Id. at 15.
36. Id.
37. Id. at 16.
38. Id.
39. Id. at 17.
40. Id. at 16.
41. Id. at 17.
42. Id.
43. Id. at 18.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 44. Id.
45. Id. at 19.
46. Id. at 19-20.
47. Id. at 20.
48. Id. at 21.
49. Id. at 21-22.
50. Id. AICDSa

51. Id. at 22.

52. Id. at 23.
53. Id.
54. Id.
55. Id. at 23-24.
56. Id. at 25.
57. Id.
58. Id. at 26.
59. Id.
60. Id. at 28.
61. Id. at 29.
62. Id. at 26.
63. Id. at 27.
64. Id. at 27-28.
65. Id. at 29.
66. Id. at 33.
67. Id. at 34.
68. Id. at 34-35.
69. Id. at 35-36.
70. Id. at 36. ESTDcC

71. Id. at 37.

72. Penned by Judge Conrado F. Manauis; CA rollo, pp. 17-40.

73. Id. at 40.

74. G.R. Nos. 147678-87, July 7, 2004, 433 SCRA 640.
75. Rollo, pp. 3-30. Penned by Associate Justice Vicente S.E. Veloso, with Associate
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 Justices Roberto A. Barrios and Amelita G. Tolentino, concurring.
76. Id. at 29.
77. Id. at 18-19.
78. RULES OF COURT, Rule 116, Sec. 3.
79. People v. Dayot, G.R. No. 88281, July 20, 1990, 187 SCRA 637.
80. People v. Lima, supra note 1, at 478.
81. Records, p. 58.

82. People v. Tahop, G.R. No. 125330, September 29, 1999, 315 SCRA 465; People v.
Lakindanum, G.R. No. 127123, March 10, 1999, 304 SCRA 429, 437-438; People v.
Petalcorin, G.R. No. 65376, December 29, 1989, 180 SCRA 685; People v. Nismal, G.R.
No. L-51257, June 25, 1982, 114 SCRA 487.
83. Supra.
84. People v. Lakindanum, supra note 82, at 433-437.
85. People v. Espejon, G.R. No. 134767, February 20, 2002, 377 SCRA 412, 414.
86. People v. Lim, G.R. Nos. 131861-63, August 17, 1999, 312 SCRA 550; People v. Malapo,
G.R. No. 127122, August 25, 1998, 294 SCRA 579.

87. People v. Losano, G.R. No. 123115, July 20, 1999, 310 SCRA 707.
88. People v. Magbanua, G.R. No. 128888, December 3, 1999, 319 SCRA 719.
89. Id. at 730.
90. CA rollo, p. 95. AaEDcS

91. People v. Magbanua, supra note 88, at 734.

92. G.R. No. 135563, September 18, 2003, 411 SCRA 288.
93. Id. at 302.
94. RULES OF COURT, Rule 110, Sec. 9.
95. G.R. No. 138471, October 10, 2002, 390 SCRA 577.

96. TSN, October 11, 2001, p. 3.

97. Id. at 29.

98. Id. at 37.
99. People v. Bello, G.R. Nos. 130411-14, October 13, 1999, 316 SCRA 804, citing People v.
Albert, G.R. No. 114011, December 11, 1995, 251 SCRA 136.
100. People v. Limio, G.R. Nos. 148804-06, May 27, 2004, 429 SCRA 597.
101. CA rollo, p. 36.
102. The amendatory law took effect on June 24, 2006.

103. People v. Barcena, G.R. No. 168737, February 16, 2006, 482 SCRA 543, 561.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com
 104. People v. Audine, G.R. No. 168649, December 6, 2006, 510 SCRA 531, 553; People v.
Alfaro, 458 Phil. 942, 963 (2003).
105. People v. Arsayo, G.R. No. 166546, September 26, 2006, 503 SCRA 275; People v.
Bonghanoy, G.R. No. 124097, June 17, 1999, 308 SCRA 383, 394; New Civil Code, Art.
2230.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2018 cdasiaonline.com