EN BANC

[G.R. No. 144656.  May 9, 2002]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. GERRICO VALLEJO Y SAMARTINO @ PUKE, accused-appellant.

D E C I S I O N

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from the decision[1] of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 88, Cavite City, sentencing Gerrico Vallejo y Samartino to death and ordering him to indemnify the heirs of the victim in the amount of P100,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages for the rape-slaying of a 9-year old child, Daisy Diolola, in Rosario, Cavite on July 10, 1999.

The Information charging accused-appellant Gerrico Vallejo with the crime of Rape with Homicide alleged:

“That on or about the 10th day of July 1999, in Barangay Ligtong I, Municipality of Rosario, Province of Cavite, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Trial Court, the above-named accused, with lewd design, by means of force and intimidation, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with DAISY DIOLOLA Y DITALO, a nine-year old child against the latter’s will and while raping the said victim, said accused strangled her to death.”

“CONTRARY TO LAW.”[2]

Accused-appellant was arraigned on July 26, 1999 and, with the assistance of counsel, pleaded not guilty to the crime charged, whereupon trial ensued.

Ten (10) witnesses testified for the prosecution, namely, Ma. Nida Diolola, the victim’s mother; Dr. Antonio S. Vertido, medico-legal officer of the NBI; Atty. Lupo Leyva; Mayor Renato Abutan of Rosario, Cavite; Atty. Sikat Agbunag of the Public Attorney’s Office; Pet Byron Buan, NBI Forensic Biologist; Aida Viloria-Magsipoc, NBI Forensic Chemist; SPO1 Arnel Cuevas of the Rosario, Cavite police station; and Jessiemin Mataverde and Charito Paras-Yepes, both neighbors of the victim.

The victim’s mother, Ma. Nida Diolola, testified that at around 1:00 o’clock in the afternoon of July 10, 1999, she sent her 9-year old daughter Daisy Diolola to their neighbor’s house in Pilapil, Ligtong I, Rosario, Cavite, so that Aimee Vallejo, the sister of accused-appellant, could help Daisy with her lessons.  Aimee’s house, where accused-appellant was also staying, is about four to five meters away from Daisy’s house.  Ma. Nida saw her daughter go to the house of her tutor.  She was wearing pink short pants and a white sleeveless shirt.  An hour later, Daisy came back with accused-appellant.  They were looking for a book which accused-appellant could copy to make a drawing or a poster that Daisy would submit to her teacher.  After finding the book, Daisy and accused-appellant went back to the latter’s house.  When Ma. Nida woke up at about 5:30 o’clock after an afternoon nap, she noticed that Daisy was not yet home.  She started looking for her daughter and proceeded to the house of Aimee, Daisy’s tutor.  Aimee’s mother told Ma. Nida that Daisy was not there and that Aimee was not able to help Daisy with her lessons because Aimee was not feeling well as she had her menstrual period.  Ma. Nida looked for Daisy in her brother’s and sister’s houses, but she was not there, either.  At about 7:00 o’clock that evening, Ma. Nida went back to her neighbor’s house, and there saw accused-appellant, who