FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 200080. September 18, 2013.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , plaintiff-appellee, vs. MARVIN

CAYANAN, accused-appellant.

RESOLUTION

REYES, J : p

Accused-appellant Marvin Cayanan (Cayanan) seeks a review of the Decision 1

dated July 14, 2011 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 04256
affirming with modifications the Consolidated Decision 2 dated June 16, 2009 of the
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Malolos City, Bulacan, Branch 77. The RTC decision
convicted Cayanan of the crimes of Qualified Rape (Criminal Case No. 1499-M-2001)
and Forcible Abduction with Qualified Rape (Criminal Case No. 1498-M-2001), and
sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each crime without
eligibility for parole.
The CA, however, increased the award of damages originally awarded by the
RTC: (1) in Criminal Case No. 1499-M-2001, from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 as civil
indemnity; and (2) in Criminal Case No. 1498-M-2001, from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00
as civil indemnity and from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 as moral damages. The CA also
awarded an additional P75,000.00 as moral damages in Criminal Case No. 1499-M-
2001 and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages in both criminal cases. 3
The prosecution established that Cayanan took advantage of 15-year old AAA 4
on February 1, 2001 while the victim was alone inside her house in . . ., Bulacan.
Cayanan is the victim's brother-in-law, being married to her older sister, and the couple
lived in a nearby house. AAA was asleep when she felt someone caressing her. It
turned out to be Cayanan. He then started kissing her and told her to remove her
shorts. When she refused, Cayanan forcibly took it off and after the latter took off his
own undergarment, he inserted his organ into her genitalia. Cayanan, who had a knife
with him, threatened to kill AAA if she resisted and informed anybody of the incident. cHCIDE

On February 26, 2001, AAA was about to enter the school campus with her friend
Armina Adriano (Adriano) when Cayanan arrived on a tricycle driven by his uncle, Boy
Manalastas. Cayanan then pulled AAA towards the tricycle. She tried shouting but he
covered her mouth. They alighted somewhere and boarded a jeep. He brought her to a
dress shop in . . ., Bulacan where he asked someone to give her a change of clothes as
she was in her school uniform and later to a Jollibee outlet. He then brought her to his
sister's house in . . . where he raped her inside a bedroom. Afterwards, a certain couple
Putay and Tessie talked to Cayanan and she was brought to the barangay office where
she was asked to execute a document stating that she voluntarily went with Cayanan. It
was the latter's mother and sister-in-law who brought her home later that evening. She
told her mother and brother of the incidents only after her classmate Adriano informed
her family of what happened in school and of the rape incidents. AAA testified that she
did not immediately tell her family because she was still in a state of shock. 5
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2025 cdasiaonline.com
 Adriano and the victim's mother corroborated her testimony. A resident
psychiatrist at the National Center for Mental Health also testified that AAA was
suffering from mental depressive symptoms/chronic symptoms and presence of sexual
abuse. 6
Cayanan interposed the sweetheart defense. The RTC, however, did not give
credit to his defense, ruling that it is a weak defense and does not rule out the use of
force given the prosecution's evidence. He also failed to establish the genuineness and
authenticity of the love letters allegedly written by AAA. 7
The CA sustained the ruling of the RTC. 8

A review of the CA decision shows that it did not commit any reversible error in
affirming Cayanan's conviction. Record shows that Cayanan forced AAA to have sex
with him on February 1, 2001 and threatened her and her family with physical harm.
The testimony of Adriano, meanwhile, corroborated AAA's testimony that Cayanan
forcibly took her by the school campus gate on February 26, 2001 and thereafter raped
her. The defense failed to show any reason why the prosecution's evidence should not
be given weight or credit. HEScID

Moreover, the claim that they were sweethearts does not justify the commission
of the crimes. For the Court to even consider giving credence to the sweetheart
defense, it must be proven by compelling evidence. The defense cannot just present
testimonial evidence in support of the theory. Independent proof is required — such as
tokens, mementos, and photographs. 9 And while Cayanan produced two love letters
allegedly written by AAA, the CA correctly sustained the finding of the RTC that these
letters were unauthenticated and therefore, bereft of any probative value.
The Court, however, finds that Cayanan should be convicted only of Qualified
Rape in Criminal Case No. 1498-M-2001. Forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of
rape if the real objective of the accused is to rape the victim. 10 In this case,
circumstances show that the victim's abduction was with the purpose of raping her.
Thus, after Cayanan dragged her into the tricycle, he took her to several places until
they reached his sister's house where he raped her inside the bedroom. Under these
circumstances, the rape absorbed the forcible abduction. 11
Finally, the CA did not commit any reversible error in increasing the amount of
civil indemnity and moral damages awarded in Criminal Case No. 1498-M-2001, and in
awarding additional P75,000.00 as moral damages in Criminal Case No. 1499-M-2001
and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages in both criminal cases, as these are in accord
with prevailing jurisprudence. 12
WHEREFORE, the Decision dated July 14, 2011 of the Court of Appeals in CA-
G.R. CR-HC No. 04256 is MODIFIED in that accused appellant Marvin Cayanan is
found guilty of Qualified Rape in Criminal Case No. 1498-M-2001. In all other respects,
the CA Decision is AFFIRMED in toto.
Interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum shall be imposed on all the
damages awarded, to earn from the date of the finality of this judgment until fully paid,
in line with prevailing jurisprudence. 13 IAETDc

SO ORDERED.
Leonardo-de Castro, * Carpio, ** Mendoza *** and Perlas-Bernabe, **** JJ., concur.

Footnotes
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2025 cdasiaonline.com
 * Acting Chairperson per Special Order No. 1549 dated September 16, 2013.

** Acting member per Special Order No. 1550 dated September 16, 2013.

*** Acting member per Special Order No. 1545 dated September 16, 2013.

**** Acting member per Special Order No. 1537 (Revised) dated September 6, 2013.

1. Penned by Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez, with Associate Justices Magdangal M. De

Leon and Socorro B. Inting, concurring; rollo, pp. 2-11.

2. Issued by Presiding Judge Rolando L. Bulan, CA rollo, pp. 47-58.

3. Rollo, p. 11.

4. The name of the victim, her personal circumstances and other information which tend to
establish or compromise her identity shall not be disclosed to protect her privacy and
fictitious initials shall, instead, be used, in accordance with People v. Cabalquinto, 533
Phil. 703 (2006) and A.M. No. 04-11-09-SC dated September 19, 2006.

5. CA rollo, pp. 48-55.

6. Id. at 52-55.

7. Id. at 55-57.

8. Rollo, pp. 9-10.

9. People v. Dahilig, G.R. No. 187083, June 13, 2011, 651 SCRA 778, 788;People v. Olesco,
G.R. No. 174861, April 11, 2011, 647 SCRA 461, 470.

10. People v. Sabadlab, G.R. No. 175924, March 14, 2012, 668 SCRA 237, 248-249;Garces
v. People, G.R. No. 173858, July 17, 2007, 527 SCRA 827, 835.

11. People v. Sabadlab, id.

12. People v. Dominguez, Jr., G.R. No. 180914, November 24, 2010, 636 SCRA 134, 163;
People v. Iroy, G.R. No. 187743, March 3, 2010, 614 SCRA 245, 253.

13. People of the Philippines v. Rolando Cabungan, G.R. No. 189355, January 23, 2013.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2025 cdasiaonline.com