G.R. No. 136394. February 15, 2001.

*
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. HERSON NAAG y
LOBAS, accused-appellant.
Evidence; Witnesses; Well-entrenched is the rule that an appellate court will
generally not disturb the assessment of the trial court on factual
_______________
41 E.g., People v. Cupino, et al., G.R. No. 125688, Apr. 3, 2000, 329 SCRA
581.
42 People v. Atrejenio, 310 SCRA 229 (1999).
* FIRST DIVISION.
695
VOL. 351, FEBRUARY 15, 2001
People vs. Naag
matters considering that the latter, as a trier of fact, is in a better position to
appreciate the same.There is no cogent reason to disturb the findings of the lower
court. Well-entrenched is the rule that an appellate court will generally not disturb
the assessment of the trial court on factual matters considering that the latter, as a
trier of fact, is in a better position to appreciate the same. The only exceptions
allowed are when the trial court has plainly overlooked certain facts of substance
which, if considered, may affect the result of the case, or in instances where the
evidence fails to support or substantiate the lower courts findings and conclusions,
or where the disputed decision is based on a misapprehension of facts. This case
does not fall under any of the exceptions. Hence, there is no reason for us to modify
the factual findings of the lower court.
Criminal Law; Rape; In rape cases, what is material is that there is
penetration of the female organ no matter how slightthe moment the accuseds
penis knocks at the door of the pudenda it suffices to constitutes the crime of rape.
In rape cases, what is material is that there is penetration of the female organ no
matter how slight. In a long line of decisions, we have ruled that the only essential
point is to prove the entrance or at least the introduction of the male organ into the
labia of the pudendum. Hence, the moment the accuseds penis knocks at the door of
the pudenda it suffices to constitute the crime of rape.
Same; Same; Witnesses; A victim has a natural knack in remembering the
face of an assailant for she, more than anybody else, would be interested in bringing
the malefactor to justice.Desiree could not have failed to recognize the appellant
because she was the victim of the assault. A truism founded on ordinary experience
is that victims of criminal violence often strive hard to recognize their assailants.
Furthermore, a victim has a natural knack in remembering the face of an assailant

for she, more than anybody else, would be interested in bringing the malefactor to
justice. On the other hand, it would be unnatural for someone who is interested in
vindicating the crime to accuse somebody other than the real culprit.
Same; Same; Robbery with Rape; In the special complex crime of robbery
with rape, the true intent of the accused must first be determined because it is his
intent that determines the offense he has committed.In the special complex crime
of robbery with rape, the true intent of the accused must first be determined because
it is his intent that determines the offense he has committed. This Court in People vs.
Dinola, citing the cases of People vs. Canastre and People vs. Faigano, held: x x x
if the intention of the accused was to rob, but rape was committed even before
696
696

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Naag
the asportation, the695
crime is robbery with rape. But if the original plan was to rape
but the accused after committing the rape also committed the robbery when the
opportunity presented itself, the offense should be viewed as separate and distinct.
To be liable for the complex crime of robbery with rape the intent to take personal
property of another must precede the rape.
Same; Same; Same; Theft; The accused should only be convicted of theft, not
robbery, where, when he took the personal properties of the rape victim, the element
of violence and intimidation was no longer present, as he inflicted force upon her
person, that was with the view and in pursuance of the rape, not of the taking.We
disagree, however, on the ruling of the trial court that the appellant is guilty of
robbery. He should only be convicted of theft because when he took the personal
properties of Desiree, the element of violence and intimidation was no longer
present. While it is true that he inflicted force upon her person, that was with the
view and in pursuance of the rape, not of the taking. When the asportation happened,
Desiree was near lifeless, incapable of putting any form of opposition.
APPEAL from a decision of the Regional Trial Court of Legaspi City, Br. 6.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Acelo M. Bailey for accused-appellant.
PUNO, J.:
One of the more interesting conceptual exercises in the field of Criminal Law is the
characterization of a crime. The challenge is not only to prove existence of its
elements. The challenge is to correctly categorize it. In the case at bar, a man
sexually defiled then immediately divested his woman-victim of her belongings. Is

he guilty of the special complex crime of Robbery with Rape or the separate crimes
of Robbery and Rape? The answer lies in his intent.
The accused in this case is a certain Herson Naag y Lobas. He was indicted for
Robbery with Rape under an Information which reads.
697
VOL. 351, FEBRUARY 15, 2001
People vs. Naag
That on or about the 8th day of January, 1996 at Daraga, Albay x x x the above
named accused, armed with a screw driver, by means of violence and intimidation,
did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, have carnal knowledge of
the complainant Desiree Gollena. against her will, by inflicting upon her with the
use of said screw multiple serious physical injuries, and thereafter said accused,
having been fully satisfied of his carnal lust over said Desiree Gollena and believing
her to be dead, with intent of gain, divested and took her personal belongings, to wit:
(1) one bag containing clothes worth P500.00 (2) one gold bracelet worth P1,500.00
(3) wallet containing P1,800.00 and (4) ladies wristwatch valued at P600.00 to the
damage and prejudice of said Desiree Gollena.
ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW.1
He pleaded not guilty during arraignment and the action proceeded to trial.
The evidence for the prosecution shows that Desiree was a singer in a band
which regularly plays at the Gloss and Glitters Disco located in Tabaco, Albay. On
the morning of January 8, 1996, she went home to Sipi, Daraga, Albay, to visit her
family. She took the bus and by about 4 oclock in the morning, she alighted at the
towns Freedom Park in Daraga. She crossed a street where two tricycles were
parked. She woke up one of the drivers and inquired whether she could be brought
to Sipi. Getting a positive response, she boarded it. Upon reaching her place, she
told him to stop and handed to him her fare. To her surprise, what she received in
return was not loose change, but a slap.
The driver then began to maul her. Desiree fought back as hard as she could,
but this made the driver more ferocious in his assault. She was strangled, boxed and
kicked. She was repeatedly stabbed with a screw driver on her face, head, and
different parts of her body. Her head was banged against the sidecar. She realized
that her struggle was in vain and would only put her life in greater danger. She
stopped resisting and pretended to be dead.
He then transported her to another place. He lifted her from the tricycle and she
thought she would be thrown to a ravine or cliff beside what appeared to be an
abandoned house. Instead, she was tossed to the ground. The driver removed her
pants and panties.
________________
1 Information, Rollo, p. 10.

698
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
People vs. Naag
She could not resist, fearing death. After her garments were removed, her legs were
spread apart and he copulated with her.
697 his lust, the driver took her wristwatch worth P600.00, a
After satisfying
bracelet worth P1,500.00 and fled with her bag containing her clothes, wallet
containing P1,800.00 in cash, and some loose change. When Desiree sensed that he
has left, the premises, she rolled down the ravine. She did not have the energy to
stand and walk and so she crawled until she reached a house, which turned out to be
the dwelling place of witness Engineer Antonio Balacano located at Sybil
Subdivision, Sipi, Daraga. She cried for help.
Engr. Balacano responded to Desirees call for assistance. He saw Desiree, a
bloodied girl, cold and torn, squatting by the gate with her pants down and hanging
on one leg. It was already 5 oclock in the morning. The wife of the engineer
telephoned local police authorities for assistance. In the meantime, Desiree was
brought to the Albay Provincial Hospital where she was given medical treatment. Dr
Jose Solano testified that the girl was in pain when he examined her and that she
sustained multiple lacerations and stab wounds on different parts of her body, and
had blackening of her left and right eyes. Dr. Aileen Francis Bartilet examined
Desirees genitalia and noted the absence of any sign of injury: there was no
bleeding, no laceration of the hymen, no contusion in the vulvar wall of the vagina,
and no abrasion.
Later that morning of January 8, 1996, policemen came to the hospital to
investigate the incident. Desiree gave a description of the suspect as well as the
tricycle. The next day, on January 9, SPO1 Pastor Perena, Jr. and SPO2 Domingo
Mabini happened to apprehend one Herson Naag y Lobas, a tricycle driver, for
driving a public utility tricycle without the necessary license. Naag and the vehicle
were brought to the police station of Daraga. Perena and Mabini realized that Naag
fit the description of the malefactor given by Desiree. They brought the confiscated
student drivers permit of Naag (which contains his photograph) to the hospital for
identification. Their hunch was confirmed when Desiree, upon being shown the
permit, identified the man in the picture as the one who raped and robbed her.
699
VOL. 351, FEBRUARY 15, 2001
People vs. Naag
When the policemen returned to the station, Naag was already gone, but not without
leaving his tricycle behind. They brought the tricycle to the hospital for
identification. Desiree did not have any difficulty in identifying the tricycle as the
same vehicle she boarded on the morning of January 8. A criminal complaint was
then filed against Naag. On February 25, 1996, he was arrested by the NBI agents of
698

Naga City at Tagkawayan, Quezon.

The accused alleged, in his defense, that it was impossible for him to be the
author of the crime at bar. He claimed that at the time and date of the incident, he
was sleeping in their house approximately seven kilometers away from where it
happened. His tricycle was not in a serviceable condition then, and he was repairing
it the night before. It was fixed only on January 9 since he was able to buy the spare
part that he needed at about 8:30 a.m. of January 8. The previous day was a Sunday
and almost all of the motor shops were closed. Hence, he alleged that he could not
have operated on the Sipi route on the 8th as his tricycle was not in running
condition. He explained that he was in Tagkawayan when he was arrested because
he had undergone hospitalization and was on an errand.
The defense also called two other witnesses to the stand who backstopped the
testimony of the accused. It presented his wife who basically reiterated the story of
her husband. She said that he was with her from the night of January 7 up to the
morning of January 8, at about 8:30, when he had to buy the spare part that he
needed for his tricycle. Similarly, it presented a certain Lino Era, a next-door
neighbor who recalled seeing the accused at about 10 oclock in the evening of
January 7 doing some repairs on his tricycle.
In the end, the trial court chose not to believe Naag. It held:
The accused in his defense put up alibi, a shabby excuse, a defense indicties never
seem to tire of (People vs. Bracamonte, 257 SCRA 380) This defense of the accused
cannot prevail over the positive identification by the victim Desiree of the accused
and of the tricycle. This defense of
700
700
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
People vs. Naag
alibi is worthless in the face of his being positively identified by the victim Desiree.
(People vs. Rivera, 242 SCRA 26)2
However, the trial court did not convict him of the crime he was originally charged
with, which is Robbery with Rape. Instead he was meted out two different sentences
for the separate crimes of Robbery and Rape, viz.:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the accused Herson Naag y Lobas is hereby
found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Rape under Art. 335(1) of
the Revised Penal Code as amended, and he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty
of imprisonment of Reclusion Perpetua with all the accessory penalties thereto
appertaining, to pay Desiree Gollena P50,000.00 as Indemnity and P50,000.00 as
moral damages.
The accused Herson Naag y Lobas is also found GUILTY beyond reasonable
doubt of the separate crime of Robbery under Art. 294 (4) of the Revised Penal
Code, and taking into consideration the Indeterminate Sentence Law he is hereby
sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment often (10) years of Prision mayor

medium in its maximum period as the minimum to fourteen (14) years, ten months
and twenty (20) days of Reclusion temporal medium period in its medium period as
the maximum and to return the ladies wrist watch worth P600.00, bracelet worth
P4,500.00, bag of clothes worth P500.00 or their total value of P2,600.00 if return
cannot be had and the cash of P1,800.00. Costs against the accused.
SO ORDERED.3
Dissatisfied with the verdict, the accused interposed this appeal. In his brief, he
made this lone assignment of error: The Lower Court erred in finding the accused
guilty of the separate crimes of Robbery and Rape.4
We affirm the conviction.
There is no cogent reason to disturb the findings of the lower court. Wellentrenched is the rule that an appellate court will generally not disturb the
assessment of the trial court on factual matters considering that the latter, as a trier
of fact, is in a better posi________________
2 Judgment, p. 5; Rollo, p. 25.
3 Decision penned by Judge Vladimir B. Brusola, Br. 6, Legaspi City.
4 Brief for Accused-Appellant, p. 3; Rollo, p. 40.
701
VOL. 351, FEBRUARY 15, 2001
People vs. Naag
tion to appreciate the same. The only exceptions allowed are when the trial court has
plainly overlooked certain facts of substance which, if considered, may affect the
result of the case, or in instances where the evidence fails to support or substantiate
the lower courts findings and conclusions, or where the disputed decision is based
on a misapprehension of facts.5 This case does not fall under any of the exceptions.
Hence, there is no reason for us to modify the factual findings of the lower court.
Even then, the appellant raises two points in support of his assignment of error
designed to sow in our minds seeds of doubt. The first relates to the medical
evidence on record while the second deals with his identity.
The appellant capitalizes, firstly, on Dr. Bartilets testimony on the absence of
fresh injury on the private part of the offended party although she was examined
almost immediately after the assault. According to him, the findings of said medical
expert negate the charge of rape. On the other hand, the prosecution contends that
the lack of injury and the healed laceration could be attributed to the sexual
intercourse she had with her boyfriend.
The appellants argument fails to impress. It is to be noted that Dr. Bartilet
herself explained that her findings did not eliminate the possibility of sexual
intercourse. She opined that it must have been done only outside the vagina but
within the external vulva merely pushing and giving some force to it.6 She added

that the appellant could have ejaculated and discharged semen on the external
genitalia even without penetrating into the vagina.
In rape cases, what is material is that there is penetration of the female organ
no matter how slight.7 In a long line of decisions, we have ruled that the only
essential point is to prove the entrance or at least the introduction of the male organ
into the labia of the pudendum.8 Hence, the moment the accuseds penis knocks at
the door of the pudenda it suffices to constitute the crime of rape.9
________________

________________
10 People vs. Melendres, 106 SCRA 575 (1981).
11 See People vs. Bundang, 272 SCRA 241 (1997).
12 See People vs. Panganiban, 241 SCRA 91 (1995).
13 TSN, September 10, 1996, p. 14.

703
VOL. 351, FEBRUARY 15, 2001
People vs. Naag
5 People vs. Limon, 306 SCRA 367 (1999).
Moreover, Desiree should have no difficulty in identifying the appellant because
6 TSN, June 4, 1996, p. 14.
when she first approached him at the centro to hire his services, the place was bright
7 People vs. Faigano, 254 SCRA 10 (1996).
and well-lighted.
8 People vs. Lazaro, 249 SCRA 235 (1995).
The appellant further argues that Desirees initial identification of him through
9 People vs. Echegaray, 257 SCRA 561 (1996).
his picture is unreliable considering the physical and emotional state she was in at
702
that time. It is urged that due to her physical and mental instability, the showing of
702
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
the student permit must have generated a prejudice in her mind that the person
People vs. Naag
shown in the picture of the drivers ID is the one who assaulted her.14
The appellant next assails the identification made by Desiree. He contends that it
The argument proceeds from a wrong assumption. It assumes that the picture
was still dark at the time of the incident. He argues that when people board a
was shown before the victim gave the description to the police. It was the other way
tricycle, they do not usually focus their attention on the driver. He states that the
around, Thus:
identity of the driver could be the least of Desirees concern for at 4 oclock in the
Court:
Have you seen him in that parking area before January 8, 1996?
morning, she would have just wanted to go home and rest in the comfort of her bed.
Desiree:
No, your honor.
We are not persuaded. Desiree could not have failed to recognize the appellant
Q:
Now, while you were in the Hospital you said that an ID was shown to you and the pictur
because she was the victim of the assault. A truism founded on ordinary experience
person and whose picture you recognize to be that of a person who raped you. Who show
is that victims of criminal violence often strive hard to recognize their assailants.10
that picture?
Furthermore, a victim has a natural knack in remembering the face of an assailant
A.
The Police Officer.
for she, more than anybody else, would be interested in bringing the malefactor to
Q:
How come that the Policeman was able to go to Albay Provincial Hospital with that ID?
justice.11 On the other hand, it would be unnatural for someone who is interested in
A:
Because when they interviewed me in the hospital, I gave them the description of the acc
vindicating the crime to accuse somebody other than the real culprit.12
his tricycle.15
To be sure, Desiree was very emphatic in her identification of the appellant as
The point is made more explicit during Desirees cross-examination:
her assailant, thus:
Atty. Gomez (continuing on cross-examination)
Court:
Now that person Herson Naag, how is he related to the accused in this case? Q Now, on that date Jan. 9, 1996 were you told by the policemen| that the person whose ID was shown
Desiree:
He is the one and same person who raped and robbed me.
: one of their suspects?
Q:
You said it was the first time you saw the accused on January 8, 1996. It was still
A dark
The ispoliceman
(sic) it told me to identify the person in the ID.
not?
:
A:
It was bright at the centro.
_______________
Q:
But it was not in park (sic) he was sleeping at that time in his tricycle. Is it not? (sic)
A:
It was bright because there were lights.
14 Brief for Accused-Appellant, p. 6, Rollo, p. 43.
Q:
But you saw him only once on Jan. 8, 1996. How were you able to recognize him in15the
Municipal
TSN,
November 10, 1996, p. 10.
building when you were asked to identify him after one month, being detained?
704
A:
As I have said, I can never forget his face.13
704
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Naag

that his intent was to rape her. He applied such force as to render her resistance to
Were you told that the owner of the ID was apprehended for violation of traffic law? his lust inutile. The kind of force used was unnecessary if he only planned to rob
Desiree. On the other hand, the excessive force was clearly meant to attain his
No, Sir. I was just asked to identify him.
lustful
scheme.
Resultantly,
when he finally forced his bestial desire on her, he was
After the ID was shown to you that was the time when you also gave them the description
of the
person,
is
able to traverse, in a manner of speaking, the path of least resistance.
(sic) it not?
Second. The appellant transported Desiree from where he first mauled her to an
A:
No, Sir. It was on Jan. 8, 1996 when I gave the description of the tricycle driver.16
abandoned place. All the time that Desiree was helpless after her mauling, appellant
We shall now ascertain the nature and extent of the criminal responsibility of the
did not concern himself with robbing Desiree even if he could have done so with
appellant. The issue is whether the crime committed by him is Robbery with Rape or
ease if not with impunity. Instead, he preoccupied himself in finding a location more
the two separate felonies of Robbery and Rape.
suited, nay, comfortable, for his plan of lying with her. Needless to say, an
In the special complex crime of robbery with rape, the true intent of the
abandoned house fits well.
accused must first be determined because it is his intent that determines the offense
Lastly, at no time did the appellant ask for the belongings of Desiree. Neither
he has committed. This Court in People vs. Dinola 17 citing the cases of People vs.
did he search her for valuables, except for the wallet in her pants. What is apparent
Canastre 18 and People vs. Faigano 19 held:
is that he only: (1) took her watch and bracelet, both easily seen and noticeable, and
x x x if the intention of the accused was to rob, but rape was committed even before
(2) fled with her bag which was already in the tricycle. These overt acts only
the asportation, the crime is robbery with rape. But if the original plan was to rape
indicate that he decided to take Desirees belongings as an afterthought and only
but the accused after committing the rape also committed the robbery when the
when the opportunity presented itself.
opportunity presented itself, the offense should be viewed as separate and distinct.
We disagree, however, on the ruling of the trial court that the appellant is
To be liable for the complex crime of robbery with rape the intent to take personal
guilty of robbery. He should only be convicted of theft because when he took the
property of another must precede the rape.
personal properties of Desiree, the element of violence and intimidation was no
We must ascertain the force which moved the appellant when he employed violence
longer present. While it is true that he inflicted force upon her person, that was with
and intimidation against the person of Desiree. It is true that the appellant raped
the view and in pursuance of the rape, not of the taking. When the asportation
Desiree before she was dispossessed of her personal properties. This, however, is not
happened, Desiree was near lifeless, incapable of putting any form of opposition.
decisive. Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code does not distinguish whether the
rape was committed before, during or after the robbery. It suffices that the robbery
706
706
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
was accompanied by rape.20
________________
People vs. Naag
The penalty for theft is determined by the value of the property taken. Under Article
309 of the Revised Penal Code, any person guilty of theft shall be punished by the
16 Ibid.
penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, if the value of
17 183 SCRA 493 (1990).
18 82 Phil. 480 (1948).
the thing stolen is more than 200 pesos but does not exceed 6,000 pesos. Applying
19 254 SCRA 10 (1996).
the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the minimum penalty to be meted out on the
appellant Naag should be anywhere within the range of 2 months and 1 day to 6
20 Aquino, Revised Penal Code, vol. III, 1988 ed., p. 127.
months of arresto mayor; and the maximum should be within the range of 6 months
705
and 1 day to 4 years
VOL. 351, FEBRUARY 15, 2001
705 and 2 months of prision correccional. Considering that no
aggravating or mitigating circumstance attended the commission of the crime, the
People vs. Naag
appellant should be sentenced to an indeterminate prison term of 4 months and 21
We agree with the conclusion of the trial court that rape was the primary intent of
days of arresto mayor maximum as the minimum, to 1 year, 8 months and 21 days of
the appellant and his taking away of the belongings of the victim was only a mere
prision correccional as the maximum.
afterthought. Although the trial court did not state the reasons for its ruling, there
IN VIEW WHEREOF, the impugned decision is hereby MODIFIED. The
exists sufficient evidence on record from where such deduction can be made.
accused-appellant Herson Naag y Lobas is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt
First. It is obvious from the degree and character of the violence and
of the crime of RAPE under Article 335 (1) of the Revised Penal Code as amended,
intimidation which the appellant employed (and when he employed it) upon Desiree
Q:
A:
Q:

and he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment of reclusion

perpetua with all the accessory penalties thereto appertaining, to pay Desiree
Gollena P50,000.00 as indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages.
The accused-appellant Herson Naag y Lobas is also found GUILTY beyond
reasonable doubt of the separate crime of THEFT under Article 308 of the Revised
Penal Code, and taking into consideration the Indeterminate Sentence Law, he is
hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment of 4 months and 21 days of
arresto mayor maximum as the minimum, to 1 year, 8 months and 21 days of prision
correccional as the maximum, and to return the ladies wristwatch worth P600.00,
bracelet worth P1,500.00, bag of clothes worth P500.00 or their total value of
P2,600.00 if return cannot be made and the cash of P1,800.00. Costs against the
accused.
SO ORDERED.
Davide, Jr. (C.J., Chairman),