Submitted to : Atty; Gene
Submitted by:
Calonge
Ambrocio, Valerie
Bibas, Beverly
Cariño, Jonathan
Galas, Ronaline
Lolor, Gretchen
Luis, Divina Gracia
Ngwar, Kyaw Swar
Mercado, Jackie
Sudiacal, Jojo
Valdez, Christian Geosep
Villanueva, Mary Grace
( G.R. No. 186441.
March 3, 2010 )
CASE DIGEST
SALVADOR FLORDELIZ y ABENOJAR, petitioner
vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent
FACT:
• Sometime in March 1995, ABC, the wife of
Salvador Flordeliz and the mother of private
complainants AAA and BBB left for Malaysia to
work so AAA and BBB were left under the
custody of Salvador in a small house in
Quezon Hill, Baguio City
FACT:
• In 2001, petitioner was released on parole so
during weekends and holidays, AAA and BBB
would stay with him in Gabriela Silang, Baguio
City.
FACT:
• In May 2002, Salvador started molesting BBB
and in 2003 BBB spent New Year’s day with
her father.
FACT:
• On January 3, 2003, Salvador inserted his two
fingers into BBB’s vagina while they were
sleeping. BBB did not stop him because of
fear. The following night, January 4, 2003, BBB
suffered the same ordeal.
FACT:
• On February 8, 2003, Salvador held BBB’s
vagina again, played with it and inserted his
fingers causing BBB pain.
FACT:
• August 3, 2003, the same incident allegedly
took place. On October 26, 2003, a day before
AAA’s birthday, Salvador did the same thing
against BBB and this time, it was for a longer
period.
FACT:
• In October 26,2003, a day before AAA’s
birthday, while BBB was with petitioner , the
latter committed the same dastardly act. This
time, it was a for a longer period.
FACT:
• During the nights of November 1 and 2, 2003
BBB experienced the same sexual abuse. The
same thing happened on December 28, 2003.
Despite these repeated acts, BBB did not tell
anybody about it for fear of her own life and
that of her mother.
CHARGES
• That sometime in the month of April 1995 up to
1996 in the City of Baguio, Philippines, and within
the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, with lewd design and
deliberate intent to cause malice and satisfy his
lascivious desire, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously touched and play the
private part of the offended party AAA, a minor
14 years of age against her will and consent
which act debeased (sic), demeaned and
degraded the intrinsic worth and dignity of the
minor as a human being.
CHARGES
• That on or about the 8th day of February 2003, in the City
of Baguio, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, by means of
force and intimidation and taking advantage of his moral
ascendancy over the private offended party he being the
biological father of said offended party, did then and there
remove the pants and underwear of said offended party
and thereupon fondles her private part and forcibly inserted
his finger into the vagina of the offended party BBB, a
minor, 11 years of age against her will and consent, which
acts constitute Rape as defined under Republic Act 8353
and which acts demeaned, debased and degraded the
intrinsic worth and dignity of the minor as a human being.
ISSUES
• 1. Whether or not petitioner Salvador is guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
Qualified Rape through Sexual
Assault, committed against BBB
• 2. Whether or not the petitioner Salvador is
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
of Acts of Lasciviousness committed against
AAA
APPELLATE COURT RULING
•Pursuant to Court of Appeals (CA) Decision and
Resolution dated July 29, 2008 and February 16,
2009, respectively, the CA affirmed Salvador’s
conviction with a modification of the amount of
his civil liabilities.
SUPREME COURT RULING
• The Court of Appeals ( CA ) Decision and Resolution
dated July 29,208 and February 16, 2009, respectively,
in CA- G.R No. 30949. The assailed decision affirmed
the Regional Trial Courts’s (RTC’s) Joint Judgement
dated March 9,2007, convicting petitioner Salvador
Flordeliz y Abenojar of
• Nine (9) counts of Rape
• ONE (1) count of Acts of Lasciviouness, with
modification of the award of damages, while the
assailed resolution denied petitioner’s motion for
reconsideration.
