People VS Dela Torre

#96
PEOPLE VS DELA TORRE

G.R. NO. 98431; January 15, 2002
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:
FACTS:
Sometime in September 1989, Marita Cordova, 35 years old and married to Paulino
Cordova, was employed as a cook at the La Fiesta Farm. Her husband and accused Josue dela
Torre were also workers of the same farm.
Anthony Inocencio testified that around 7:00 to 8:00 P.M. of November 5, 1989, Paulino
Cordova went to see him at his farm, also located in Barrio Pantay, Teresa, Rizal, near the La
Fiesta Farm. Paulino asked for his assistance because the accused, then armed with a knife and
bolo, was causing trouble and commotion at the La Fiesta Farm of Mr. Alindada. Anthony
responded to Paulino's call for help. Upon arriving at the La Fiesta Farm, he learned that the
accused forcibly took the shoes and money of Mr. Alindada’s workers. Marita and her children
asked Anthony whether they could stay in his farm. He obliged and they all proceeded there. Upon
reaching the farm, Marita told Anthony that she was raped by the accused that night. Thereupon,
he immediately fetched policemen from Teresa, Rizal and accompanied them to the La Fiesta
Farm where the accused was accosted.
As to how the rape was committed, Marita, the principal witness for the prosecution,
recounted her harrowing experience at the hands of the accused. She testified that around 8:00
o’clock in the evening of November 5, 1989, she was cooking at the kitchen of the La Fiesta
Farm. She was with her five (5) children then suddenly, the accused, holding a knife and a bolo,
appeared in the kitchen and dragged her outside and brought her towards a house under
construction about 200 meters away. Marita’s children tried to follow but they desisted when the
accused threatened them.
Once inside the house, the accused pushed Marita to the floor, stoop down in front of her,
poked the knife at her throat and pinned her arms at her back. He then raised her dress above
her breast. Thereupon, he pulled down his pants, took off her panty and placed himself on top
of her. Still holding the knife, he pointed it at Marita’s throat and placed the bolo on the ground.
Afterwards, he spread her legs, kissed her lips down to her neck and sucked her breast. He then
inserted his penis into her vagina and made push and pull movements for about eight (8)
minutes and continued kissing her on the lips. While he was raping her, she was unable to resist
because the knife was pointed at her throat and her arms pinned at her back. Thereafter, he stood
and threatened her not to tell anybody about the incident as he would slash her neck.
Upon the other hand, the evidence for the defense is based solely on the testimony of
accused Josue Dela Torre. He never denied having sexual contact with Marita that night of
November 5, 1989. He claimed, however, that she was his mistress and that the carnal incident
between them was consensual.
The Court finds the accused JOSUE DELA TORRE GUILTY of the crime of RAPE under
Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code.
In the instant appeal, the appellant ascribed that the court erred in finding accused guilty
beyond reasonable doubt.
ISSUES: (1) Whether or not the accused-appellant guilty of the crime charged?
(2) Whether or not an aggravating circumstance of dwelling present in the case at bar?
HELD: (1) Yes. Evidently, Marita was cowed to submit to appellant’s sexual assault through force
and intimidation. Appellant was brandishing a knife and a bolo when he dragged her to a nearby
house being constructed. Even while appellant was raping her, he was holding the knife pointed
at her throat. After the sexual aggression, he further threatened to cut off Marita’s neck if she
would tell the authorities what happened. The act of holding a knife/bolo, a deadly weapon, by
itself strongly suggests force, or intimidation, and when the same is used to threaten a woman to
ensure carnal knowledge of her, rape is certainly committed.
(2) Yes. The Information alleges the presence of the aggravating circumstance of dwelling
in the commission of the offense. This should have been appreciated by the court a quo. It
appears from the records that the kitchen at the La Fiesta Farm where Marita was dragged by
appellant is her dwelling, albeit the same does not belong to her. In People v. Parazo, this Court
stressed that the dwelling contemplated in Article 14(3) of the Revised Penal Code does not
necessarily mean that the victim owns the place where he lives or dwells. Be he a lessee, a
boarder, or a bedspacer, the place is his home, the sanctity of which the law seeks to
protect. The fact that the crime was consummated in the nearby house is also immaterial. Marita
was forcibly taken by appellant from her dwelling house (kitchen) and then raped her. Dwelling is
aggravating if the victim was taken from his house although the offense was not completed
therein.

People VS Dela Torre

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

People VS Dela Torre

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

People VS Dela Torre

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

#96

PEOPLE VS DELA TORRE

You might also like