You are on page 1of 2


---vs--Gabriel Flores
Rule 130 Section 1
1. In April 13, 1996, Jennifer Flores, 14yo step daughter of herein accused Gabriel Flores, was
raped inside her room by the accused Gabriel. The prosecutions version:
a. That while Jennifer was sleeping, she was awoken by someone touching her
breasts who turned out to be his father, who ordered her to take off her clothes
under threat to kill her. Then he inserted his penis in her vagina to which he
eventually satisfied himself. At first she could only tell of the ordeal to her
neighbor fiend and was afraid to tell her mother, but eventually she did.
b. She and her mother then went to Camp Crame wherein it was found that she was
sexually molested. The accused was eventually arrested and in a confrontation in
Pasig Capitol, the accused admitted to the mother of what he did and he also gave
the mother a letter admitting w hat he did to his step daughter
2. The defense posits the following version:
a. He categorically denied raping her and said that her daughter may have testified
against her after repeatedly scolding her against having so many boyfriends. As
to his wife, he said that she testified against her due to a misunderstanding and
disagreement regarding a loan.
3. RTC ruled against the accused and found him GUILTY. It said that the victims testimony
was frank, sincere, and straightforward. The victim was in fact in the verge of crying while
ISSUE: One of the issues raised by the accused w as that the trial court gravely erred in
giving credit and probative value to the letter he allegedly gave to his w ife.
HELD: Such letter w as immaterial.
A scrutiny of the RTC decision belies the allegation that the decision heavily relied on the
letter he supposedly gave. In fact, the decision of the trial court was based on the complaining
witness testimony which was found to be frank, sincere, and straightforward.
In rape cases, an accused may be convicted based solely on the testimony of a witness,
provided that such testimony is credible, natural, convincing and consistent with human
nature and the normal course of things. Rape, by its nature, is committed with the least
possibility of being seen by the public, and the fact that a witness is present could raise serious
doubts on its commission.
However, SC finds it erroneous that RTC imposed the death penalty. Nowhere in the
information was it mentioned that the victim was only 14yo at the time the crime was
committed, nor was there any evidence nor allegation in the information that the accused is

the father of the victim. What was merely proven was that the accused was living as a
common-law spouse of the victims mother. For failing to conjointly allege and prove the
qualifying circumstances of minority and relationship, the crime committed was only simple
rape punishable by reclusion perpetua .
WHEREFORE, the finding of guilt is AFFIRMED, but lowering the sentence to reclusion