People vs.

Sobusa FACTS: This is a qualified rape case filed against the defendant Herminigildo Sobusa by his stepdaughter, who is 11 years old. The incident happened sometime before April 17, 2000, at about a quarter of nine in the evening while she was sleeping, she was awakened when she felt that somebody was mashing her whole body and was found out that it was his stepfather whom she called as her papa.The accused undressed himself and pulled down her shorts with her panty to her knees and inserted his penis into her (complainant) vagina and made a push and pull movement. The doctor explained that the findings in the Medico Legal Certificate that there is a presence of hymenal laceration caused by trauma through the forcible insertion of a stiff or hard penis into the vagina of the victim. ISSUE/S: Whether or not the accused/defendant is guilty of qualified rape. Whether or not the accused is mitigated by voluntary surrender. HELD: The Court affirmed the conviction of the accused-appellant. The accused-appellant was convicted beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of qualified rape on the basis of the following: (1) AAAs credible testimony concerning the rape incident; (2) AAAs positive identification of accusedappellant as the one who raped her; (3) physical evidence consistent with AAAs assertion that she was raped; and (4) the absence of ill motive on AAAs part in filing the charge. Testimonies of child victims are given full weight and credit, for when a woman or a girl-child says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was indeed committed. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity. AAAs testimony that she was raped by the accused-appellant is highly trustworthy not only because of the fact that she was merely a young lass below twelve years of age at the time she testified before the trial court who would not concoct a sordid tale against his stepfather whom she endearingly calls papa -/but more so because of her candid, positive, direct, and consistent narration of how her stepfather sexually abused her. Jurisprudence is likewise settled that when the rape victims testimony is corroborated by the physicians finding of penetration, there is sufficient foundation to conclude the existence of the essential requisite of carnal knowledge. Laceration, whether healed or fresh, is the best physical evidence of forcible defloration. The prosecution successfully established the qualifying circumstance of relationship of AAA with the accused-appellant as well as AAAs minority. AAA is the stepdaughter of the accused-appellant in view of the marriage of AAAs mother with accused-appellant.[22] The birth certificate of AAA, on the other hand, proves that she was only 10 years old on the month of April of the year 2000 or at the time the rape was committed.[23] Accused-appellants attempt to mitigate his culpability by claiming that he voluntarily surrendered to the police immediately after being informed of the charges against him is futile.

Jurisprudence requires that a surrender, to be voluntary, must be spontaneous and must clearly indicate the intent of the accused to submit himself unconditionally to the authorities either because he acknowledges his guilt or he wishes to save the authorities the trouble and expense incidental to his search and capture. The following requisites should likewise be present: (1) the offender had not been actually arrested; (2) the offender surrendered himself to a person in authority or to the latters agent; (3) the surrender was voluntary; and (4) there is no pending warrant of arrest or information filed. In this case, the accused-appellant surrendered only after having been informed of the charge of rape against him or about two months from the commission of the alleged crime. He even denied the said charge upon his purported surrender. The alleged surrender, therefore, does not qualify as a mitigating circumstance.