Case Digest: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v . ROBERTO BALACANAO y QUINES et al 398 SCRA (2003)

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v . ROBERTO BALACANAO y QUINES et al 398 SCRA (2003)

The failure of the prosecution’s witness to point the exact number of perpetrators is of no consequence. Fifteen (15) armed men stormed the house of Manuel Calata and his wife ―AAA‖ in Cagayan. Conspiring together and helping one another with intent to gain, the armed men stole and carried away several personal properties to the damage and prejudice of the owner and on occasion thereof, had sexual intercourse with the offended party AAA against her will. Roberto Balacanao, Ensu Caronan, Eriberto Batuelo, Abraham Camayang, Elpidio Gangan, Roberto Salvador, Martin Soriano and Tacio Acorda pleaded not guilty upon arraignment. Five of those charged, namely: Jessie Acorda, Herminio Acorda, Villamor Agana, Elvis Bangayan and Gil Tambiao, eluded arrest. On motion of the prosecution, Damaso Cabana was discharged to become a state witness. The trial court found Balacanao, Salvador, Soriano, Batuelo, Gangan, Camayang, Caronan, Tacio Acorda and Ruben Acorda guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the special complex crime of Robbery with Rape aggravated by abuse of superior strength and ignominy.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the trial court erred in basing its decision of conviction on the confessional testimony of Damaso Cabana in the identification of the accused

HELD:

Balacanao et al. contend that the prosecution failed to establish their identity as participants in the crime, hence, it was error for the trial court not to have appreciated their alibi. They assail the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, particularly drawing attention to Cabana‘s statement that there were five who sexually abused AAA which contradicts the latter‘s testimony that there were four, thus rendering his testimony unworthy of belief From the testimony of state witness Cabana, and his identification in court of Balacanao et al., there can be no mistaking in their participation in the crime. Cabana‘s failure to point out the exact number of AAA‘s sexual tormentors is of no consequence, Balacanao et al. themselves having noted that the testimony of Cabana as regards this point is hearsay and inadmissible. AAA also positively identified accused Balacanao, Caronan and accused-appellants Camayang and Tacio Acorda as the four men who sexually abused her. Balacanao et al. also capitalize on the failure of AAA to correctly identify her sexual abusers during the preliminary investigation AAA‘s confusion should not militate against her given the number of malefactors and the ordeal she went through. What counts is that she was firm at the witness stand that her rapists, and the order in which they raped her, were what she mentioned thereat. AAA‘s incorrect identification during the preliminary investigation of her sexual abusers is inconsequential with respect to the criminal liability of accused-appellants.