Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • G.R. No. 128882

    Uploaded by

    Alexandra Krishna Mangubat Orino
    41 views1 page
    The accused, Joel Ayuda, was convicted of raping Gloriphine based on her testimony. Gloriphine said that Ayuda dragged her away at gunpoint and raped her. Ayuda claimed they were in a relationship, but the court believed Gloriphine's testimony. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, finding Gloriphine credible despite minor inconsistencies. It ruled that Ayuda's guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The damages awarded to Gloriphine were also affirmed with modifications to the amounts.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The accused, Joel Ayuda, was convicted of raping Gloriphine based on her testimony. Gloriphine said that Ayuda dragged her away at gunpoint and raped her. Ayuda claimed they were in a relationship, but the court believed Gloriphine's testimony. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, finding Gloriphine credible despite minor inconsistencies. It ruled that Ayuda's guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The damages awarded to Gloriphine were also affirmed with modifications to the amounts.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    41 views1 page

    G.R. No. 128882

    Uploaded by

    Alexandra Krishna Mangubat Orino
    The accused, Joel Ayuda, was convicted of raping Gloriphine based on her testimony. Gloriphine said that Ayuda dragged her away at gunpoint and raped her. Ayuda claimed they were in a relationship, but the court believed Gloriphine's testimony. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, finding Gloriphine credible despite minor inconsistencies. It ruled that Ayuda's guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The damages awarded to Gloriphine were also affirmed with modifications to the amounts.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Case #42

    G.R. No. 128882. October 2, 2003 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. JOEL AYUDA SUBJECT OF APPEAL : REVIEW OF THE DECISION IN CRIMINAL CASE 634 SENTENCING THE ACCUSED OF RECLUSION PERPETUA FOR THE CRIME OF RAPE FACTS: On May 3, 1993 around 2:00 oclock early dawn, Gloriphine(private complainant) and Jocelyn Seno went home from a benefit dance. At first, they were just being accompanied by Lorenzo Campilan and were followed by the accusedappellant. Jocelyn and Lorenzo walked ahead, leaving the two of them behind. When they passed near a waiting shed, Gloriphine was ordered to stop and with 3516 caliber pointed on her right cheek, she was dragged in a grassy place 3-4 meters away from the said shed. There feloniously, against the will of the victim, Joey successfully carried out his lewd design. She was warned thereafter not to disclose what transpired to anyone or she would be killed by said accusedappellant. However, on her way home, she met Clodualdo and related the incident to him. When she reached her home, she threw her sanitary napkin in the trash can. She reported to the police on the next day and on May 5, 1993 executed the affidavit and subjected to medical examination. Joey, on his defense, denied the crime and claimed that they were sweethearts for almost a year before the alleged incident. What transpired on the early dawn of May 3, 1993 was a sexual tryst between lovers. ISSUES: 1. 2. Whether or not appellants guilt was established beyond reasonable doubt? Whether or not the inconsistencies in the testimony of the lone witness unmerited the conviction issued by the trial court?

    SC RULINGS: 1. 2. The victims testimony indubitably shows the guilt of the accused-appellant. The elements of the crime of rape as provided in the Revised Penal Code were present proving that the accused had carnal knowledge with Gloriphine through force and intimidation, and such merits conviction. Minor inconsistencies in the testimony of the victim shall not affect her credibility as witness and warrant acquittal on the end of the accused. Such minor contradictions are perceived to enhance rather than detract her credibility. Aside from the fact of a well-settled rule that appellate courts are not to disturb findings of trial courts especially on the credibility of the witness being one in position to have perceived firsthand all reactions, language uttered, blushing of the victim while being examined in the witness stand.

    Joey Ayudas conviction of Reclusion Perpetua by the Regional Trial Court was affirmed with modifications on the amount of damages to be indemnified with the victim inclusive of civil, moral (both 50K) and exemplary (25K).

    You might also like