CASE DIGEST
[G.R. No. L-57875. July 5, 1983.]
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ERNESTO T. SUÑGA alias "MANNING", Defendant-
Appellant.
The Solicitor General for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Basilio V. Zanaria, for Defendant-Appellant.
Facts
While Leonora Deang is walking along the barangay road Ernesto Sunga held her and covered her mouth
so that she cannot shout. Leanora resisted and pushed Ernesto backed, and then Ernesto threatened her
to kill her if she tells her husband about what happened. Ernesto boxed her again and held her neck
until Leonora lost consciousness and fell on the ground. When she woke up, she realized that the
accused was having carnal knowledge of her. Ernesto was holding him very tight by the neck and she
could not move. Salome Perez was in her house about 15 meters away from the incident while talking to
her neighbors the dog barked and she went there with a flashlight and saw some movements and went
closely together with Hernandez and Batac there they see Ernesto Sunga doing it with a woman they
can’t recognized because the head of Sunga is covering her face. When Sunga noticed the three, he
shouted to leave them or else he would kill him. Upon hearing it the three went back to the house of
perez. Then
Sunga left also. Leonora Deang went back home and told her husband about what happened they
immediately went to the barangay and the police authorities. The next day Leonora was examined by
Dr. Danilo Yumul of Central Luzon General Hospital and had found an abrasion in the right upper chest
about 1 peso coin size.
A Rape complaint was filed by Leonora Deang on the basis of Provincial Fiscal of Pampanga filed as an
information against Ernesto T. Sunga.
As a defense, Sunga admitted having carnal knowledge of a woman during that evening of November
3,1979 at the back of the house of Mrs. Perez with Letty Legaspi , his girlfriend. The trial court rendered
a judgement finding Sunga guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and imposed upon him
life imprisonment with the accessory penalty of the law. Sunga appealed to this court claiming that the
prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt/.
Issue
Whether or not the court erred in their first decision about the case of Sunga
Ruling of the Court
There were to ruling in this case first was the rule of the court regarding the first case that was filed by
the woman who complaint about the rape which was decided by the court that the accused was guilty
of rape beyond reasonable double while the next ruling is about the appeal of the accused that reversed
the case because the evidence is weak.
The defense of Sunga was weak, He cannot be convicted because the constitutional presumption of
innocence was not proven. As held in the case of People v. Gargoles, 83 SCRA 282, " an accused is
presumed innocent until the contrary is proven and that, consequently, the burden of proof as to the
offense charged lies on the prosecution. Accordingly, an accused should be convicted based on the
strength of the evidence presented by the prosecution and not on the weakness of his defense." "An
evidence to be believed must not only proceed from the mouth of credible witness, but it must be
credible in itself-such as the common experience of mankind can approve as probable under the
circumstance.". Since the evidence of the prosecution is not sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused
the court reversed and acquitted Ernesto Sunga of the crime of rape in this case.
