People V.
Antivola Issue: Whether or not the standard for reviewing an
Facts:
By December 1997, Rachel de Guzman was already
five years of age. She lived with her parents at No.
174 Donacion, Angat, Bulacan,a piscatorial village in
the vicinity of a river. In the afternoon of December
4, 1997, Rachel, together with three other children,
were playing outside. Rachel saw the appellant Rodel
(Bungi) Antivola feeding the fishes in the nearby
fishpond. The appellant approached Rachel and
asked her to go with him inside his house, telling her
that they would play another game. Unsuspecting,
she acceded and went with the appellant.
Once inside the house, the appellant removed
Rachel’s shorts and touched her private parts. She
cried, but the appellant was unmoved. He brought
out his penis and inserted it into Rachel’s vagina,
causing the child excruciating pain. After satiating his
lust, the appellant let her go and instructed her to
step out.
Rachel did as she was told. She went home and did
not tell anyone about what happened. Her mother,
Sally de Guzman, noticed the crease marks on her
clothes. That afternoon, while Sally was bathing
Rachel, she noticed a reddish discoloration on
Rachel’s private part. Baffled, she asked her daughter
about it, who pointed to the appellant "Bungi," as
the one who defiled her.Sally then promptly reported
the incident to the police authorities who
apprehended the appellant. The following day, Sally
executed a sworn statement before Judge Eric T.
Calderon.
The appellant denied raping Rachel and disclaimed
having a moniker "Bungi.” He averred that the charge
against him was contrived by Rachel’s family out of
envy, for having been chosen by Nicolas as the
caretaker of his fishpond.
On December 8, 1997, Dr. Manuel C. Aves, Medico-
Legal Officer of the Bulacan Provincial Crime
Laboratory Office, examined Rachel. His Medico-
Legal Report revealed the multiple fresh lacerations
(superficial) at 3, 9, 11 o’clock with swelling and
congestion. Dr. Aves explained that the fresh
lacerations on Rachel’s hymen could have been
caused by "manipulation of the organ or penetration
of whatsoever.”
appeal from a conviction for rape was correct.
Ruling:
In reviewing rape cases, this Court is guided by three
principles: (1) an accusation of rape can be made
with facility and while the accusation is difficult to
prove, it is even more difficult for the person
accused, although innocent, to disprove; (2)
considering the intrinsic nature of the crime, only
two persons being usually involved, the testimony of
the complainant should be scrutinized with great
caution; (3) the evidence for the prosecution must
stand or fall on its own merit, and cannot be allowed
to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence
for the defense.
Rachel’s testimony was direct, candid, and replete
with details of the rape. She testified that after
touching her private parts, the appellant inserted his
penis inside her vagina, Rachel’s testimony says it all.
It is marked by spontaneity, honesty and sincerity.
When a woman, more so if she is a minor, says that
she has been raped, she says in effect all that is
necessary to show that rape was committed. 38Youth
and immaturity are generally badges of truth and
sincerity. In rape cases, the testimony of the victim
alone, if credible, is sufficient to convict the accused
of the crime. The medical certificate is presented
merely to corroborate the victim’s declaration that
she was sexually molested. In fact, what is more
telling in the medical findings proffered in evidence
by the prosecution is the presence of hymenal
lacerations in different positions in the victim’s
genitalia which is the best physical evidence of her
forcible defloration.
People v. Barcena
Facts: Edgardo Barcena, the accused, is the common
law wife of Nenita Barcena, which is the mother of
victim, Estrella Cabida. Barcena was charge
with qualified rape as defined and penalized
under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as
amended by Republic Act 7659 due to the fact that
the victim is a minor 15 years old and the accused
was the common-law husband of his mother. strella
testified that she was alone in their house in the
morning of April 10, 1997 when suddenly the
accused strangled and embraced her from behind
pulling her from their sala to the room, where she
was ravished. After the incident, she was warned b&
the accused not to tell anyone or else she would
be killed. The accused, however, raised the
defenses of denial and alibi. He testified that during
Aril 10, 1997, on that morning he reported for work
at a Rice Mill and went home already in the
evening. He insisted that the rape case is motivated
because of the remorse of Nenita’s relatives against
him, since he squandered the money of the latter.
The alibi of the accused was corroborated by his co-
worker at the rice mill, which testified that the
accused really reported for work that day. The
accused further averred that the age of Estrella
was not duly established due to the fact that only a
photocopy of the latter’s birth certificate was
presented. The lower court found the accused
guilty of the offense of qualified rape through the
use of force or intimidation, having been committed
with the attendant circumstance of “the victim is
under eighteen years of age and the offender is
the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim”
When the case was elevated to the CA it was
affirmed.

Issue: Whether or not the averments in the

information or complaint was duly established.

Ruling: Without doubt, a certificate of live birth is a

public record in the custody of the local civil registrar
who is a public officer. Clearly, therefore, the
presentation of the photocopy of the birth certificate
of Alpha Jane is admissible as secondary evidence to
prove its contents. Production of the original may be
dispensed with, in the trial court’s discretion,
whenever in the case at hand the opponent does not
bona fide dispute the contents of the document and
no other useful purpose will be served by requiring
production. In the case at bar, the defense did not
dispute the contents of the photocopied birth
certificate; in fact it admitted the same. Having failed
to raise a valid and timely objection against the
presentation of this secondary evidence the same
became a primary evidence, and deemed admitted
and the other party is bound thereby.

In fine, we find that the prosecution sufficiently

proved that Estrella was 15 years old when she was
raped on April 10, 1997 by the appellant who was
the common-law spouse of her mother.