Republic v. Capco de TensuanG.R. No. 171136; October 23, 2013Facts: Tensuan filed with the MeTC an Application for Registration involving 2 parcels of land in Taguig City. The OSG filed an Opposition to Tensuan's Application claiming, among others, that the lands sought to be registered are public and inalienable lands. The Laguna Lake Development Authority likewise opposed Tensuan's Application, claiming that the subject parcels of land form part of Laguna Lake and is, therefore, inalienable. During the course of the land registration proceedings, Tensuan presented a Certification from the CENRO-DENR which declared the subject lands as already alienable and disposable. After hearing, the MeTC granted Tensuan's Application for Registration Upon appeal by the Republic, the CA affirmed the MeTC decision In its petition for review before the SC, the Republic argues that there is insufficient evidence to establish that the lands sought to be registered no longer form part of the inalienable lands of the public domainREMEDIAL LAWIssue: WON in this case, the Republic can raise issues on questions of fact under Rule 45Held/Ratio: YES. Although it is true that where it is the sufficiency of evidence that is being questioned, it is a question of fact and therefore is not a proper subject of petitions for review on certiorari under Rule 45, the same admits of certain exceptions. The exceptions apply when the factual findings complained of are devoid of support by the evidence on record, or the assailed judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts. In this case, one of the requisites for filing an application for registration of title is that the land sought to be registered must be shown to be alienable and disposable at the time of the application. Here, Tensuan presented a CENRO-DENR Certification to prove that the land was alienable and disposable. However, the SC had previously declared that a CENRO Certification, on its own, is insufficient proof to establish that a parcel of land is alienable and disposable. This is because CENRO is not the official repository of the issuances of the DENR Secretary and as such, has no probative value. Thus, the application of Tensuan must be denied.

People v. EsperaG.R. No. 202868; October 2, 2013Facts: Espera was charged with the crimes of Rape by Sexual Intercourse and Rape by Sexual Assault The victim, Ana, narrated that while on her way home one night after work somewhere in Bohol, she and a friend hailed a tricycle to take them to the barangay where they lived. After her friend had alighted, the tricycle driver, later identified as Espera, took Ana to a secluded place under the pretext that the tricycles brakes had malfunctioned. While she was walking home from the secluded area, an armed man, with his face covered by a t-shirt, attacked her and committed the crimes complained of. Espera became a suspect of the crime as Ana and her friend identified him as the tricycle driver and recognized his voice as the voice of the attacker as well as the t-shirt he wore on the night of the attack. Espera subsequently fled from Bohol but was later on apprehended in Pampanga. After trial, the RTC convicted him of the crimes imputed. Espera appealed to the CA, claiming that the prosecution failed to establish his identity as the perpetrator of the crime considering that the rape was allegedly committed by a man who had his face covered with a t-shirt. The CA affirmed Esperas convictionREMEDIAL LAWIssue: WON the prosecution was able to establish the identity of Espera as the author of the crimes.Held/Ratio: YES. It is true that the constitutional guarantee of presumption of innocence accorded to every accused means that the prosecution must not only establish the elements of the crimes imputed but likewise establish the identity of the person accused as the author of such crimes. In reviewing criminal cases as far as the identity of the accused is concerned, the SC takes into account the credibility of the prosecution witness who made the identification as well as the prosecutions compliance with legal and constitutional standards. In this case, Ana and her friend positively identified Espera as the one who ferried them in the tricycle and both had recognized the t-shirt he was wearing on the night of the incident. Ana likewise recognized Espera, by face and by voice, when the latter was first brought to the police station as a suspect of the rape and positively identified him in open court during the trial as the malefactor of the crime. Thus, by the clear, categorical, consistent and credible testimonies of the witnesses, Esperas guilt has been established by proof beyond reasonable doubt.

People v. CuaycongG.R. No. 196051; October 2, 2013Facts: Jade Cuayong was charged with two counts of statutory rape by carnal knowledge. The prosecution claimed that AAA, an 8 year old child of Jades lover, BBB, was sleeping one night when she felt someone removing her shorts. She saw that it was Jade and despite her pleas for him to stop, he nevertheless had his way with her. AAA told her aunt, CCC, of what happened and after bringing AAA to be checked in the hospital, they immediately went to the police, which thereafter apprehended Jade. AAA likewise recounted that on a previous occasion, Jade had also inserted his penis into her anus against her will. Jade denied the accusations against him, claiming it to be a story concocted by AAA together with the latters mother because BBB already had a new lover to replace him. AAA narrated all these during the hearings of the case. A doctor Carpio who examined AAA testified that the latter told him that the accused had inserted his fingers in her vagina. After trial, the RTC convicted him of the crimes charged. Upon appeal, the CA affirmed one count of statutory rape by sexual intercourse but downgraded the other count to acts of lasciviousness since the rape committed by the insertion of the penis in the victims anus should have been charged as rape by sexual assault. In this appeal, Jade claims that he cannot be found guilty of the crimes charged, assailing the credibility of AAAs testimony for some alleged inconsistencies as to the description of the alleged rape. He likewise points out that the testimony of Dr. Carpio reveals that there is a contradiction as to what was really inserted in AAAs vagina. REMEDIAL LAWIssue: WON the inconsistencies in AAAs testimonies is sufficient to overturn the decision of the caseHeld/Ratio: NO. The SC ruled that for a discrepancy or inconsistency in the testimony of a witness to serve as a basis for acquittal, it must establish beyond doubt the innocence of the appellant for the crime charged since the credibility of a rape victim is not diminished, let alone impaired, by minor inconsistencies in her testimony. This is especially true in cases where the alleged inconsistencies refer only to minor details. In this case, the alleged inconsistencies in AAAs testimony do not deviate from the fact that AAA categorically identified Jade as the one who raped her. Thus, there is no reason to veer away from the principle of affording great respect and even finality to the trial courts assessment of the credibility of witnesses. CRIMINAL LAWIssue: WON the allegation that AAA and BBB were motivated by ill motive in charging Jade with the crime deserves consideration.Held/Ratio: NO. It is unnatural for a parent, more so for a mother, to use her offspring as an engine of malice especially if it will subject her child to humiliation and disgrace. Likewise, no young girl would concoct a sordid tale on her own or through the influence of her mother, undergo an invasive medical examination then subject herself to the stigma and embarrassment of a public trial, if her motive was other than a fervent desire to seek justice.

3