Appellant’s Brief Maria Ria Vic Capin

People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio LLB III B

Page 1 of 7 Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

Republic of the Philippines

COURT OF APPEALS
National Capital Judicial Region
Ermita, Manila
THIRD DIVISION

ALFRED GREGORIO
Accused-Appellant,

- versus - CA-GR. No. 1234-2018

For: Rape under Article 266 – A
Revised Penal Code.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee.

x-------------------------------------x

BRIEF FOR APPELLEE

Complainant-Appellee, by counsel, and to this Honorable Court

respectfully files his brief for the Appellee.

PREFATORY STATEMENT

The Trial Court did not commit any error on its decision and so must be

sustained.
Appellant’s Brief Maria Ria Vic Capin
People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio LLB III B
Page 2 of 7 Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

THE PARTIES

ALFRED GREGORIO is the appellant as represented by Binangkal’s Associate

where process and notice from this court may be served at room 270

Washington St., Makati City, while THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES is the Appellee

as represented by the CITY PROSECUTOR’S OFFICE OF MAKATI.

TIMELINESS OF THE APPEAL

Accused-appellant received on February 9, 2018 the Decision of the Regional

Trial Court promulgated on the same date. A Notice of Appeal was timely filed

on February 21, 2018. Accused-appellant received on May 7, 2018 the Order

from the Court of Appeals directing Accused-appellant to file his Appeal Brief

within fifteen (15) days from receipt. Appellee received the appellant’s brief on

May 20, 2018. Appellee filed his Appellee’s Brief on May 23, 2018. Hence, this

timely compliance.
Appellant’s Brief Maria Ria Vic Capin
People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio LLB III B
Page 3 of 7 Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1.1 Appellee admits the statements of Facts in the Appellant’s Brief from
statement 1.1-1.6 but denies statement 1.7.

1.2 Appellant was at the scene of the crime of rape alleged and was not drinking
beer with his buddies.

1.3 The common law wife was not aware of the whereabouts of her husband,
herein accused between 9 in the evening up to 1 in the early morning.

II

ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR

The trial court did not commit any error which injuriously affected the

substantial rights of the accused.

III

ARGUMENTS

Appellant’s failure to question

the existence of the knife is
deemed an admission to its
existence and use during the
crime.
Appellant’s Brief Maria Ria Vic Capin
People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio LLB III B
Page 4 of 7 Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

During the trial, the accused depended heavily on his alibi and the
testimony of his common law wife. The appellant failed to question the knife
used in the crime and only raises for the first time on appeal its production. His
failure should be deemed an admission that the knife existed and that it was
possessed and used by him during the scene of the crime.

Lack of scream nor plea for

help does not amount to
consensual rape.

A victim of rape acts in different ways when confronted in such a

situation. Not every rape victim can be expected to act conformably to the
usual expectations of everyone. Some may shout, some may faint; and some
may be shocked into insensibility, while others may openly welcome the
intrusion. The force or violence that is required in rape cases is relative. When
applied, it need not be overpowering or irresistible. It is enough that it has
enabled the offender to consummate his purpose to bring about the desired
result. It is not even necessary that the offender be armed with a weapon.
(PEOPLE V CAMBI ,G.R. No.127131 June 8, 2000)

Appellant’s accusation that

victim had sexual intercourse
with another party and was
hiding a relationship is baseless.

Accused-Appellant’s accusation of the victim as hiding a

relationship is without proof and must be disregarded.

Evidence of bruises, attempts to

scratch are not required to
prove rape.

As already stated earlier, each victim reacts to a crime of rape

differently. The law does not impose upon a rape victim the burden of proving
resistance. (People v Sending G.R. 141773 Jan 20, 2003)
Appellant’s Brief Maria Ria Vic Capin
People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio LLB III B
Page 5 of 7 Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

Medico Legal’s testimony

corroborates that rape was
committed.

Dr Tan’s discovery that there were no other bruises nor DNA evidence of
scratches does not discount the occurrence of rape, as already stated earlier,
the victim reacts to the crime differently. Where resistance would be futile,
offering none at all does not amount to consent to the sexual assault. (People v
Las Pinas G.R. 133444 Feb 20, 2002).

It is enough that Dr Tan’s testimony states that the injuries on her vagina
are consistent that a sexual assault was committed against her within 24 hours
since this is only corroborating evidence from the lone testimony of the victim.

Accused’s alibi and testimony

of the common law wife are
self-serving.

The alibi of the accused and the testimony of his common law wife
are self-serving and the trial court was correct in rejecting it.

The trial court did not commit

any substantial error in its
judgment of conviction.

Except for the question on the existence of the knife which was
raised only for the first time on appeal, all of the other defences of the acussed-
appellant are mere rehash of its argument in the lower court which was already
decided upon. Under Sec 10, Rule 124 of the Rules of Court “Judgment not to
be reversed or modified except for substantial error. — No judgment shall be
reversed or modified unless the Court of Appeals, after an examination of the
Appellant’s Brief Maria Ria Vic Capin
People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio LLB III B
Page 6 of 7 Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

record and of the evidence adduced by the parties, is of the opinion that error
was committed which injuriously affected the substantial rights of the appellant.

The information is sufficient in

form and substance.

Contrary to what the accused-appellant stated, the information was

sufficient in all aspects and with regards particularly to the element of force or
intimidation, it was enough that the complainant mentioned the use of a knife
to show force or intimidation. The information need not describe the weapon
nor describe further in detail how it was used. (Sec 6, Rule 110 of the Rules of
Court)

IV

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the Appellee respectfully prays that Decisions of the trial court be

sustained.

Appellee further prays for such other relief as may be just and equitable in

the premises.

May 23, 2018.

Appellant’s Brief Maria Ria Vic Capin
People of the Philippines v. Alfred Gregorio LLB III B
Page 7 of 7 Legal Forms

x-------------------------------x

EXPLANATION

(Pursuant to Section 11, Rule 13

1997 Rules of Civil Procedure)

Undersigned counsel informs this Honorable Court that this Appellant’s Brief was
furnished and filed by registered mail due to lack of messengerial services.