You are on page 1of 49

The Ruling of the MTC In its Joint Order of 16 January 1997

("Joint Order"), the MTC12 initially deferred ruling on
petitioners’ motion for lack of "indubitable ground for the
quashing of the [I]nformations x x x." The MTC scheduled
petitioners’ arraignment in February 1997. However, on
petitioners’ motion, the MTC issued a Consolidated Order on
28 April 1997 ("Consolidated Order"), granting partial
reconsideration to its Joint Order and quashing the
Informations for violation of PD 1067 and PD 984. The MTC
maintained the Informations for violation of RA 7942 and
Article 365 of the RPC. The MTC held: [T]he 12 Informations
have common allegations of pollutants pointing to "mine
tailings" which were precipitately discharged into the
Makulapnit and Boac Rivers due to breach caused on the
Tapian drainage/tunnel due to negligence or failure to
institute adequate measures to prevent pollution and siltation
of the Makulapnit and Boac River systems, the very term
and condition required to be undertaken under the
Environmental Compliance Certificate issued on April
1,1990.
The allegations in the informations point to same set [sic] of
evidence required to prove the single fact of pollution
constituting violation of the Water Code and the Pollution
Law which are the same set of evidence necessary to prove
the same single fact of pollution, in proving the elements
constituting violation of the conditions of ECC, issued
pursuant to the Philippine Mining Act. In both instances, the
terms and conditions of the Environmental Compliance
Certificate were allegedly violated. In other words, the same
set of evidence is required in proving violations of the three
(3) special laws. After carefully analyzing and weighing the
contending arguments of the parties and after taking into
consideration the applicable laws and jurisprudence, the
Court is convinced that as far as the three (3) aforesaid laws
are concerned, only the Information for [v]iolation of
Philippine Mining Act should be maintained. In other words,
the Informations for [v]iolation of Anti-Pollution Law (PD 984)
and
the
Water
Code
(PD
1067)
should
be
dismissed/quashed because the elements constituting the
aforesaid violations are absorbed by the same elements
which constitute violation of the Philippine Mining Act (RA
7942). Therefore, x x x Criminal Case[] Nos. 96-44, 96-45
and 96-46 for [v]iolation of the Water Code; and Criminal
Case[] Nos. 96-47, 96-48 and 96-49 for [v]iolation of the AntiPollution Law x x x are hereby DISMISSED or QUASHED
and Criminal Case[] Nos. 96-50, 96-51 and 96-52 for
[v]iolation of the Philippine Mining Act are hereby retained to
be tried on the merits. The Information for [v]iolation of
Article 365 of the Revised Penal Code should also be
maintained and heard in a full blown trial because the
common accusation therein is reckless imprudence resulting
to [sic] damage to property. It is the damage to property
which the law punishes not the negligent act of polluting the
water system. The prosecution for the [v]iolation of Philippine
Mining Act is not a bar to the prosecution for reckless
imprudence resulting to [sic] damage to property.13The MTC
re-scheduled petitioners’ arraignment on the remaining
charges on 28 and 29 May 1997. In the hearing of 28 May
1997, petitioners manifested that they were willing to be
arraigned on the charge for violation of Article 365 of the
RPC but not on the charge for violation of RA 7942 as they
intended to appeal the Consolidated Order in so far as it
maintained the Informations for that offense. After making of
record petitioners’ manifestation, the MTC proceeded with
the arraignment and ordered the entry of "not guilty" pleas
on the charges for violation of RA 7942 and Article 365 of the
RPC. Petitioners subsequently filed a petition for certiorari
with the Regional Trial Court, Boac, Marinduque, assailing
that portion of the Consolidated Order maintaining the

Informations for violation of RA 7942. Petitioners’ petition
was raffled to Branch 94. For its part, public respondent filed
an ordinary appeal with the same court assailing that portion
of the Consolidated Order quashing the Informations for
violation of PD 1067 and PD 984. Public respondent’s
appeal was raffled to Branch 38. On public respondent’s
motion, Branch 38 ordered public respondent’s appeal
consolidated with petitioners’ petition in Branch 94. The
Ruling of Branch 94 In its Resolution14 of 20 March 1998,
Branch 94 granted public respondent’s appeal but denied
petitioners’ petition. Branch 94 set aside the Consolidated
Order in so far as it quashed the Informations for violation of
PD 1067 and PD 984 and ordered those charges reinstated.
Branch 94 affirmed the Consolidated Order in all other
respects. Branch 94 held:After a careful perusal of the laws
concerned, this court is of the opinion that there can be no
absorption by one offense of the three other offenses, as
[the] acts penalized by these laws are separate and distinct
from each other. The elements of proving each violation are
not the same with each other. Concededly, the single act of
dumping mine tailings which resulted in the pollution of the
Makulapnit and Boac rivers was the basis for the
information[s] filed against the accused each charging a
distinct offense. But it is also a well-established rule in this
jurisdiction that –"A single act may offend against two or
more entirely distinct and unrelated provisions of law, and if
one provision requires proof of an additional fact or element
which the other does not, an acquittal or conviction or a
dismissal of the information under one does not bar
prosecution under the other. x x x." x x x x [T]he different
laws involve cannot absorb one another as the elements of
each crime are different from one another. Each of these
laws require [sic] proof of an additional fact or element which
the other does not although they stemmed from a single
act.15
Petitioners filed a petition for certiorari with the Court of
Appeals alleging that Branch 94 acted with grave abuse of
discretion because (1) the Informations for violation of PD
1067, PD 984, RA 7942 and the Article 365 of the RPC
"proceed from and are based on a single act or incident of
polluting the Boac and Makalupnit rivers thru dumping of
mine tailings" and (2) the duplicitous nature of the
Informations contravenes the ruling in People v.
Relova.16Petitioners further contended that since the acts
complained of in the charges for violation of PD 1067, PD
984, and RA 7942 are "the very same acts complained of" in
the charge for violation of Article 365 of the RPC, the latter
absorbs the former. Hence, petitioners should only be
prosecuted for violation of Article 365 of the RPC.17The
Ruling of the Court of Appeals In its Decision of 5 November
2001, the Court of Appeals affirmed Branch 94’s ruling. The
appellate court held: The records of the case disclose that
petitioners filed a motion to quash the aforementioned
Informations for being duplicitous in nature. Section 3 of
Rule 117 of the Revised Rules of Court specifically provides
the grounds upon which an information may be quashed. x x
x x x x x [D]uplicity of Informations is not among those
included in x x x [Section 3, Rule 117]. x x x x We now go to
petitioners’ claim that the resolution of the public respondent
contravened the doctrine laid down in People vs. Relova for
being violative of their right against multiple prosecutions. In
the said case, the Supreme Court found the People’s
argument with respect to the variances in the mens rea of
the two offenses being charged to be correct. The Court,
however, decided the case in the context of the second
sentence of Article IV (22) of the 1973 Constitution (now
under Section 21 of Article III of the 1987 Constitution),
rather than the first sentence of the same section. x x x x x x
x [T]he doctrine laid down in the Relova case does not

squarely apply to the case at Bench since the Informations
filed against the petitioners are for violation of four separate
and distinct laws which are national in character. x x x x This
Court firmly agrees in the public respondent’s understanding
that the laws by which the petitioners have been [charged]
could not possibly absorb one another as the elements of
each crime are different. Each of these laws require [sic]
proof of an additional fact or element which the other does
not, although they stemmed from a single act. x x x x x x x
[T]his Court finds that there is not even the slightest indicia
of evidence that would give rise to any suspicion that public
respondent acted with grave abuse of discretion amounting
to excess or lack of jurisdiction in reversing the Municipal
Trial Court’s quashal of the Informations against the
petitioners for violation of P.D. 1067 and P.D. 984. This Court
equally finds no error in the trial court’s denial of the
petitioner’s motion to quash R.A. 7942 and Article 365 of the
Revised Penal Code.18Petitioners sought reconsideration
but the Court of Appeals denied their motion in its Resolution
of 14 March 2002. Petitioners raise the following alleged
errors of the Court of Appeals: I. THE COURT OF APPEALS
COMMITTED A R[E]VERSIBLE ERROR IN MAINTAINING
THE CHARGES FOR VIOLATION OF THE PHILIPPINE
MINING ACT (R.A. 7942) AND REINSTATING THE
CHARGES FOR VIOLATION OF THE WATER CODE (P.D.
1067) AND POLLUTION CONTROL LAW (P.D. 984),
CONSIDERING THAT:
A. THE INFORMATIONS FOR VIOLATION OF THE WATER
CODE (P.D. 1067), THE POLLUTION CONTROL LAW (P.D.
984), THE PHILIPPINE MINING ACT (R.A. 7942) AND
ARTICLE 365 OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE PROCEED
FROM AND ARE BASED ON A SINGLE ACT OR INCIDENT
OF POLLUTING THE BOAC AND MAKULAPNIT RIVERS
THRU DUMPING OF MINE TAILINGS. B. THE
PROSECUTION OF PETITIONERS FOR DUPLICITOUS
AND MULTIPLE CHARGES CONTRAVENES THE
DOCTRINE LAID DOWN IN PEOPLE VS. RELOVA, 148
SCRA 292 [1986 THAT "AN ACCUSED SHOULD NOT BE
HARASSED BY MULTIPLE PROSECUTIONS FOR
OFFENSES WHICH THOUGH DIFFERENT FROM ONE
ANOTHER ARE NONETHELESS EACH CONSTITUTED BY
A COMMON SET OR OVERLAPPING SETS OF
TECHNICAL ELEMENTS." II. THE COURT OF APPEALS
COMMITTED A REVERSIBLE ERROR IN RULING THAT
THE ELEMENT OF LACK OF NECESSARY OR
ADEQUATE
PRECAUTION,
NEGLIGENCE,
RECKLESSNESS AND IMPRUDENCE UNDER ARTICLE
356 [sic] OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE DOES NOT
FALL WITHIN THE AMBIT OF ANY OF THE ELEMENTS OF
THE PERTINENT PROVISIONS OF THE WATER CODE,
POLLUTION CONTROL LAW AND PHILIPPINE MINING
ACT CHARGED AGAINST PETITIONERS[.]19The Issues
The petition raises these issues: (1) Whether all the charges
filed against petitioners except one should be quashed for
duplicity of charges and only the charge for Reckless
Imprudence Resulting in Damage to Property should stand;
and (2) Whether Branch 94’s ruling, as affirmed by the Court
of Appeals, contravenes People v. Relova. The Ruling of the
Court The petition has no merit. No Duplicity of Charges in
the Present Case Duplicity of charges simply means a single
complaint or information charges more than one offense, as
Section 13 of Rule 11020 of the 1985 Rules of Criminal
Procedure clearly states:Duplicity of offense. – A complaint
or information must charge but one offense, except only in
those cases in which existing laws prescribe a single
punishment for various offenses. In short, there is duplicity
(or multiplicity) of charges when a single Information charges
more than one offense.21Under Section 3(e), Rule 11722 of
the 1985 Rules of Criminal Procedure, duplicity of offenses

in a single information is a ground to quash the Information.
The Rules prohibit the filing of such Information to avoid
confusing the accused in preparing his defense.23 Here,
however, the prosecution charged each petitioner with four
offenses, with each Information charging only one offense.
Thus, petitioners erroneously invoke duplicity of charges as
a ground to quash the Informations. On this score alone, the
petition deserves outright denial. The Filing of Several
Charges is Proper Petitioners contend that they should be
charged with one offense only — Reckless Imprudence
Resulting in Damage to Property — because (1) all the
charges filed against them "proceed from and are based on
a single act or incident of polluting the Boac and Makalupnit
rivers thru dumping of mine tailings" and (2) the charge for
violation of Article 365 of the RPC "absorbs" the other
charges since the element of "lack of necessary or adequate
protection, negligence, recklessness and imprudence" is
common among them. The contention has no merit. As early
as the start of the last century, this Court had ruled that a
single act or incident might offend against two or more
entirely distinct and unrelated provisions of law thus
justifying the prosecution of the accused for more than one
offense.24
The only limit to this rule is the Constitutional prohibition that
no person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment for
"the same offense."25 In People v. Doriquez,26 we held that
two (or more) offenses arising from the same act are not "the
same" —x x x if one provision [of law] requires proof of an
additional fact or element which the other does not, x x x.
Phrased elsewise, where two different laws (or articles of the
same code) define two crimes, prior jeopardy as to one of
them is no obstacle to a prosecution of the other, although
both offenses arise from the same facts, if each crime
involves some important act which is not an essential
element of the other.27 (Emphasis supplied) Here, double
jeopardy is not at issue because not all of its elements are
present.28 However, for the limited purpose of controverting
petitioners’ claim that they should be charged with one
offense only, we quote with approval Branch 94’s
comparative analysis of PD 1067, PD 984, RA 7942, and
Article 365 of the RPC showing that in each of these laws on
which petitioners were charged, there is one essential
element not required of the others, thus: In P.D. 1067
(Philippines Water Code), the additional element to be
established is the dumping of mine tailings into the
Makulapnit River and the entire Boac River System without
prior permit from the authorities concerned. The gravamen
ofthe offense here is the absence of the proper permit to
dump said mine tailings. This element is not indispensable in
the prosecution for violation of PD 984 (Anti-Pollution Law),
[RA] 7942 (Philippine Mining Act) and Art. 365 of the Revised
Penal Code. One can be validly prosecuted for violating the
Water Code even in the absence of actual pollution, or even
[if] it has complied with the terms of its Environmental
Compliance Certificate, or further, even [if] it did take the
necessary precautions to prevent damage to property. In
P.D. 984 (Anti-Pollution Law), the additional fact that must be
proved is the existence of actual pollution. The gravamen is
the pollution itself. In the absence of any pollution, the
accused must be exonerated under this law although there
was unauthorized dumping of mine tailings or lack of
precaution on its part to prevent damage to property. In R.A.
7942 (Philippine Mining Act), the additional fact that must be
established is the willful violation and gross neglect on the
part of the accused to abide by the terms and conditions of
the Environmental Compliance Certificate, particularly that
the Marcopper should ensure the containment of run-off and
silt materials from reaching the Mogpog and Boac Rivers. If
there was no violation or neglect, and that the accused

satisfactorily proved [sic] that Marcopper had done
everything to ensure containment of the run-off and silt
materials, they will not be liable. It does not follow, however,
that they cannot be prosecuted under the Water Code, AntiPollution Law and the Revised Penal Code because violation
of the Environmental Compliance Certificate is not an
essential element of these laws. On the other hand, the
additional element that must be established in Art. 365 of the
Revised Penal Code is the lack of necessary or adequate
precaution, negligence, recklessness and imprudence on the
part of the accused to prevent damage to property. This
element is not required under the previous laws.
Unquestionably, it is different from dumping of mine tailings
without permit, or causing pollution to the Boac river system,
much more from violation or neglect to abide by the terms of
the Environmental Compliance Certificate. Moreover, the
offenses punished by special law are mal[a] prohibita in
contrast with those punished by the Revised Penal Code
which are mala in se.29Consequently, the filing of the
multiple charges against petitioners, although based on the
same incident, is consistent with settled doctrine. On
petitioners’ claim that the charge for violation of Article 365 of
the RPC "absorbs" the charges for violation of PD 1067, PD
984, and RA 7942, suffice it to say that a mala in se felony
(such as Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Damage to
Property) cannot absorb mala prohibita crimes (such as
those violating PD 1067, PD 984, and RA 7942). What
makes the former a felony is criminal intent (dolo) or
negligence (culpa); what makes the latter crimes are the
special laws enacting them. People v. Relova not in Point
Petitioners reiterate their contention in the Court of Appeals
that their prosecution contravenes this Court’s ruling in
People v. Relova. In particular, petitioners cite the Court’s
statement in Relova that the law seeks to prevent
harassment of the accused by "multiple prosecutions for
offenses which though different from one another are
nonetheless eachconstituted by a common set or
overlapping sets of technical elements." This contention is
also without merit.1avvphil.net
The issue in Relova is whether the act of the Batangas
Acting City Fiscal in charging one Manuel Opulencia
("Opulencia") with theft of electric power under the RPC,
after the latter had been acquitted of violating a City
Ordinance penalizing the unauthorized installation of
electrical wiring, violated Opulencia’s right against double
jeopardy. We held that it did, not because the offenses
punished by those two laws were the same but because the
act giving rise to the charges was punished by an ordinance
and a national statute, thus falling within the proscription
against multiple prosecutions for the same act under the
second sentence in Section 22, Article IV of the 1973
Constitution, now Section 21, Article III of the 1987
Constitution. We held: The petitioner concludes that: "The
unauthorized installation punished by the ordinance [of
Batangas City] is not the same as theft of electricity [under
the Revised Penal Code]; that the second offense is not an
attempt to commit the first or a frustration thereof and that
the second offense is notnecessarily included in the offense
charged in the first information."The above argument[ ] made
by the petitioner [is] of course correct. This is clear both from
the express terms of the constitutional provision involved –
which reads as follows: "No person shall be twice put in
jeopardy of punishment for the same offense. If an act is
punished by a law and an ordinance, conviction or acquittal
under either shall constitute a bar to another prosecution for
the same act." x x x and from our case law on this point. The
basic difficulty with the petitioner’s position is that it must be
examined, not under the terms of the first sentence of Article

IV (22) of the 1973 Constitution, but rather under the second
sentence of the same section. The first sentence of Article IV
(22) sets forth the general rule: the constitutional protection
against double jeopardy is not available where the second
prosecution is for an offense that is different from the offense
charged in the first or prior prosecution, although both the
first and second offenses may be based upon the same act
or set of acts. The second sentence of Article IV (22)
embodies an exception to the general proposition: the
constitutional protection, against double jeopardy is available
although the prior offense charged under an ordinance be
different from the offense charged subsequently under a
national statute such as the Revised Penal Code, provided
that both offenses spring from the same act or set of acts. x
x x30 (Italicization in the original; boldfacing supplied)Thus,
Relova is no authority for petitioners’ claim against multiple
prosecutions based on a single act not only because the
question of double jeopardy is not at issue here, but also
because, as the Court of Appeals held, petitioners are being
prosecuted for an act or incident punished by four national
statutes and not by an ordinance and a national statute. In
short, petitioners, if ever, fall under the first sentence of
Section 21, Article III which prohibits multiple prosecution for
the same offense, and not, as in Relova, for offenses arising
from the same incident. WHEREFORE, we DENY the
petition. We AFFIRM the Decision dated 5 November 2001
and the Resolution dated 14 March 2002 of the Court of
Appeals. SO ORDERED.
ARSENIA B. GARCIA, Petitioner, vs. HON. COURT OF
APPEALS and the PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondents D E C I S I O N QUISUMBING, J.:This petition
seeks the review of the judgment of the Court of Appeals in
CA-G.R. CR No. 245471that affirmed the conviction of
petitioner by the Regional Trial Court2of Alaminos City,
Pangasinan, Branch 54, for violation of Section 27(b) of
Republic Act No. 6646.3Based on the complaint-affidavit of
Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr., who ran in the 1995 senatorial
elections, an information dated March 30, 1998, was filed in
the Regional Trial Court of Alaminos, charging Herminio R.
Romero, Renato R. Viray, Rachel Palisoc and Francisca de
Vera, and petitioner, with violation of Section 27(b). The
information reads: That on or about May 11, 1995, which
was within the canvassing period during the May 8, 1995
elections, in the Municipality of Alaminos, Province of
Pangasinan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, Election
Officer Arsenia B. Garcia, Municipal Treasurer Herminio R.
Romero, Public School District Supervisor Renato R. Viray,
Chairman,
Vice-Chairman,
and
Member-Secretary,
respectively, of the Municipal Board of Canvassers of
Alaminos, Pangasinan, tabulators Rachel Palisoc and
Francisca de Vera, conspiring with, confederating together
and mutually helping each other, did, then and there, willfully,
and unlawfully decrease[d] the votes received by senatorial
candidate Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. from six thousand nine
hundred ninety-eight (6,998) votes, as clearly disclosed in
the total number of votes in the one hundred fifty-nine (159)
precincts of the Statement of Votes by Precincts of said
municipality, with Serial Nos. 008417, 008418, 008419,
008420, 008421, 008422 and 008423 to one thousand nine
hundred twenty-one (1,921) votes as reflected in the
Statement of Votes by Precincts with Serial No. 008423 and
Certificate of Canvass with Serial No. 436156 with a
difference of five thousand seventy-seven (5,077) votes.
CONTRARY TO LAW.4In a Decision dated September 11,
2000, the RTC acquitted all the accused for insufficiency of
evidence, except petitioner who was convicted as follows: x
x x 5. And finally, on the person of Arsenia B. Garcia, the

Court pronounces her GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt, of
thecrime defined under Republic Act 6646, Section 27 (b) for
decreasing the votes of Senator Pimentel in the total of
5,034 and in relation to BP Blg. 881, considering that this
finding is a violation of Election Offense, she is thus
sentenced to suffer an imprisonment of SIX (6) YEARS as
maximum, but applying the INDETERMINATE SENTENCE
LAW, the minimum penalty is the next degree lower which is
SIX (6) MONTHS; however, accused Arsenia B. Garcia is
not entitled to probation; further, she is sentenced to suffer
disqualification to hold public office and she is also deprived
of her right of suffrage. The bailbond posted by her is hereby
ordered cancelled, and the Provincial Warden is ordered to
commit her person to the Bureau of Correctional Institution
for Women, at Metro Manila, until further orders from the
court. No pronouncement as to costs. IT IS SO
ORDERED.5Petitioner appealed before the Court of Appeals
which affirmed with modification the RTC Decision, thus,
WHEREFORE, foregoing considered, the appealed decision
is hereby affirmed with modification, increasing the minimum
penalty imposed by the trial court from six (6) months to one
(1) year. SO ORDERED.6The Court of Appeals likewise
denied the motion for reconsideration. Hence, this appeal
assigning the following as errors of the appellate court: I ON
THE FIRST AND SECOND GROUNDS RELIED UPON BY
THE RESPONDENT COURT, NAMELY, THAT IT COULD
NOT HAVE BEEN SECRETARY VIRAY WHO DECREASED
THE VOTES OF COMPLAINANT PIMENTEL SINCE HE
MERELY RELIED ON WHAT THE PETITIONER DICTATED,
AND THAT IT COULD NOT HAVE ALSO BEEN THE
TABULATORS BECAUSE PETITIONER WAS THE ONE
WHO READ THE ADDING [MACHINE] TAPE. IION THE
THIRD GROUND, NAMELY, THAT PETITIONER DID NOT
PRODUCE THE TAPES DURING THE TRIAL BECAUSE IF
PRODUCED, IT IS GOING TO BE ADVERSE TO HER.
IIION THE FOURTH GROUND, NAMELY, THAT THE
PETITIONER WAS THE ONE WHO ENTERED THE
REDUCED FIGURE OF 1,921 IN THE CERTIFICATE OF
CANVASS (COC), Exh. "7", WHEN THE DUTY WAS THAT
OF THE SECRETARY OF THE BOARD. IVTHE
REDUCTION OF THE VOTES OF CANDIDATE PIMENTEL
WAS
CLEARLY
NOT
WILLFUL
OR
INTENTIONAL.7Petitioner contends that (1) the Court of
Appeals’ judgment is erroneous, based on speculations,
surmises and conjectures, instead of substantial evidence;
and (2) there was no motive on her part to reduce the votes
of private complainant. Respondent on the other hand
contends that good faith is not a defense in the violation of
an election law, which falls under the class of mala prohibita.
The main issue is, Is a violation of Section 27(b) of Rep. Act
No. 6646, classified under mala in se ormala prohibita?
Could good faith and lack of criminal intent be valid
defenses? Generally, mala in se felonies are defined and
penalized in the Revised Penal Code. When the acts
complained of are inherently immoral, they are deemed mala
in se, even if they are punished by a special
law.8Accordingly, criminal intent must be clearly established
with the other elements of the crime; otherwise, no crime is
committed. On the other hand, in crimes that are mala
prohibita, the criminal acts are not inherently immoral but
become punishable only because the law says they are
forbidden. With these crimes, the sole issue is whether the
law has been violated.9Criminal intent is not necessary
where the acts are prohibited for reasons of public
policy.10Section 27(b) of Republic Act No. 664611provides:
SEC. 27. Election Offenses.- In addition to the prohibited
acts and election offenses enumerated in Sections 261 and
262 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 881, as amended, the following
shall be guilty of an election offense: x x x (b) Any member of

the board of election inspectors or board of canvassers who
tampers, increases, or decreases the votes received by a
candidate in any election or any member of the board who
refuses, after proper verification and hearing, to credit the
correct votes or deduct such tampered votes.
x x x Clearly, the acts prohibited in Section 27(b) are mala in
se.12For otherwise, even errors and mistakes committed
due to overwork and fatigue would be punishable. Given the
volume of votes to be counted and canvassed within a
limited amount of time, errors and miscalculations are bound
to happen. And it could not be the intent of the law to punish
unintentional election canvass errors. However, intentionally
increasing or decreasing the number of votes received by a
candidate is inherently immoral, since it is done with malice
and intent to injure another. Criminal intent is presumed to
exist on the part of the person who executes an act which
the law punishes, unless the contrary shall appear.13Thus,
whoever invokes good faith as a defense has the burden of
proving its existence. Records show that the canvassing of
votes on May 11, 1995 before the Board of Canvassers of
the Municipality of Alaminos, Pangasinan was conducted as
follows: 1. After the votes in the 159 precincts of the
municipality of Alaminos were tallied, the results thereof
were sealed and forwarded to the Municipal Board of
Canvassers for canvassing; 2. The number of votes received
by each candidate in each precinct was then recorded in the
Statement of Votes with appellant, in her capacity as
Chairman, reading the figures appearing in the results from
the precincts and accused Viray, in his capacity as secretary
of the Board, entering the number in the Statements of Votes
as read by the appellant. Six Statements of Votes were filled
up to reflect the votes received by each candidate in the 159
precincts of the Municipality of Alaminos, Pangasinan. 3.
After the number of votes received by each candidate for
each precincts were entered by accused Viray in the
Statements of Votes, these votes were added by the
accused Palisoc and de Vera with the use of electrical
adding machines. 4. After the tabulation by accused Palisoc
and de Vera, the corresponding machine tapes were handed
to appellant who reads the subtotal of votes received by
each candidate in the precincts listed in each Statement of
Votes. Accused Viray [then] records the subtotal in the
proper column in the Statement of Votes. 5. After the
subtotals had been entered by accused Viray, tabulators
accused Palisoc and de Vera added all the subtotals
appearing in all Statement of Votes. 6. After the computation,
the corresponding machine tape on which the grand total
was reflected was handed to appellant who reads the same
and accused Viray enters the figure read by appellant in the
column for grand totalin the Statement of Votes.14Neither
the correctness of the number of votes entered in the
Statement of Votes (SOV) for each precinct, nor of the
number of votes entered as subtotals of votes received in
the precincts listed in SOV Nos. 008417 to 008422 was
raised as an issue. At first glance, however, there is a
noticeable discrepancy in the addition of the subtotals to
arrive at the grand total of votes received by each candidate
for all 159 precincts in SOV No. 008423.15The grand total of
the votes for private complainant, Senator Aquilino Pimentel,
was only 1,921 instead of 6,921, or 5,000 votes less than the
number of votes private complainant actually received. This
error is also evident in the Certificate of Canvass (COC) No.
436156 signed by petitioner, Viray and Romero.16During
trial of this case, petitioner admitted that she was indeed the
one who announced the figure of 1,921, which was
subsequently entered by then accused Viray in his capacity
as secretary of the board.17Petitioner likewise admitted that
she was the one who prepared the COC (Exhibit A-7),
though it was not her duty. To our mind, preparing the COC

Chy cried out. on September 26. a decrease of 5. I will not let him live long. When Chy found an opportunity to escape. the group passed by the store of Aurelia Esquibel. Chy appealed for the group to quiet down as the noise from the videoke machine was blaring.-CR No. The discrepancy may be validly attributed to mistake or error due to fatigue. "Bakit mo ako sinuntok hindi ka naman [inaano]?" (Why did you box me[?] I’m not doing anything to you.000. defined and penalized under Article [248] of the Revised Penal Code. Foz shoved Chy causing the latter to fall.23As between the grand total of votes alleged to have been received by private complainant of 6.998." (This Manny is really arrogant. Jr. Sen. I will finish him off today.)8 Later that afternoon. The Certificate of Canvass for senatorial candidates and its supporting statements of votes prepared by the municipal board of canvassers are sensitive election documents whose entries must be thoroughly scrutinized. 27544 affirming the Decision2 dated July 2. committed as follows: That on or about September 29.)6On September 28. The dispositive portion of the RTC decision reads: WHEREFORE. Cagayan (Branch 9) found petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of homicide. the instant petition is DENIED.5Upon arraignment.19 The fact that the number of votes deducted from the actual votes received by private complainant. Any error on their part would result in the disenfranchisement of the voters. was coming out of his house at the time. unlawfully and feloniously assault. the group convened at the house of Foz and Garcia. Enraged at the memory.000. Petitioner reached for a bottle of beer."7Yet again.21Public policy dictates that extraordinary diligence should be exercised by the members of the board of canvassers incanvassing the results of the elections. the group headed to the store of Adela dela Cruz where they drank until petitioner proposed that they move to Punta. salivating. At this juncture. as amended by Republic Act No. and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. and Fred Rillon mused over the drinking session on the 26th and 28th of September and the confrontation with Chy. 1999. 2000. This further infuriated petitioner who remarked. 2) Ordering him to pay the heirs of Manuel Chy the amount of FIFTY THOUSAND (P50. petitioner blurted out "Talaga a napangas dayta a day[t]oy a Manny ikabbut ko ita. "This Manny is really arrogant. and with it. There. the votes in the SOV should total 6. with intent to kill. Upon being summoned. Chy’s sister. D E C I S I O N QUISUMBING. Upon reaching Chy’s house. struck the lower back portion of Chy’s head. inflicting upon the latter fatal injuries which caused his death. with evident premeditation and with treachery. The mere decreasing of the votes received by a candidate in an election is already punishable under the said provision. He was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital.m. unlocked the door and found Chy lying unconscious on the kitchen floor. at around 12:00 p. On their way to Punta. However. Josefina arrived minutes later.m. as well as of the Court of Appeals are final and conclusive and may not be reviewed on appeal. SO ORDERED AMADO ALVARADO GARCIA. 7659. representing expenses for the wake .22In our review.:For review on certiorari is the Decision1 dated December 20. the RTC of Aparri. "Dayta a Manny napangas makaala caniac dayta. Aparri. CONTRARY TO LAW. he ran towards his house and phoned his wife Josefina to call the police. WHEREFORE. petitioner’s concern was to assure accurate. armed with a bottle.18Neither can this Court accept petitioner’s explanation that the Board of Canvassers had no idea how the SOV (Exhibit "6") and the COC reflected that private complainant had only 1. hereby sentences him to suffer an indeterminate prison term of TEN (10) YEARS OF PRISION MAYOR. as minimum. Chy. the policemen knocked five times but nobody answered. Aquilino Pimentel. particularly where the findings of both the trial court and the appellate court on the matter coincide. At around 7:00 p. Petitioner.000 votes as reflected in the Statement of Votes and Certificate of Canvass is substantial. 1999. correct and authentic entry of the votes. Provincial Prosecutor accuses AMADO GARCIA @ Manding of the crime of Murder. After trial in due course.998 is a difference of 77 votes. in the municipality of Aparri. "Talaga a napangas ni Manny saan ko a pagbayagen daytoy. Foz attempted to pacify petitioner but was himself hit on the nose while Chy continued to parry the blows. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. which was adjacent to the house of Manuel K. and there.00) PESOS. Foz. Respondent. trial on the merits ensued. which found petitioner Amado Garcia guilty beyond reasonable doubt of homicide. was not added to any senatorial candidate does not relieve petitioner of liability under Section 27(b) of Rep. Unknown to Chy.. Then.)9But petitioner kept on assaulting him.921 votes instead of 6. The assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals sustaining petitioner’s conviction but increasing the minimum penalty in her sentence to one year instead of six months isAFFIRMED. As chairman of the Municipal Board of Canvassers. 2006 denying petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration. Cagayan. petitioner was charged with murder in an Information that alleges as follows: The undersigned. Contested as well is the appellate court’s Resolution3 dated March 13. 2003 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC). 1999. manifests an intention to perpetuate the erroneous entry in the COC. we see no valid reason to disturb the factual conclusions of the appellate court. 6646. Chy. I will lay a hand on him. 2005 of the Court of Appeals in CAG. the group met again to celebrate the marriage of Ador Tacuboy not far from Chy’s apartment. it cannot be allowed to remain on record unchallenged. the above-named accused. to FOURTEEN (14) YEARS and EIGHT (8) MONTHS of RECLUSION TEMPORAL as maximum. especially when the error results from the meretransfer of totals from one document to another.921 votes and statement of his actual votes received of 6. TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND (P200. Jr. Chy told Josefina about the mauling and complained of difficulty in breathing. Her failure to exercise maximum efficiency and fidelity to her trust deserves not only censure but also the concomitant sanctions as a matter of criminal responsibility pursuant to the dictates of the law. incidentally. Branch 9." meaning. Thereafter. this left petitioner irate and petitioner was heard to have said in the Ilocano vernacular. 1999. The factual antecedents are as follows: At approximately 11:00 a. Fidel Foz. province of Cagayan. Maya Mabbun advised the group to stop singing lest they be told off again. petitioner. decided to have some drinks.even if it was not her task. The autopsy confirmed that Chy died of myocardial infarction. box." (This Manny is arrogant. as death indemnity. did then and there wilfully. The Court has consistently held that factual findings of the trial court. Jr. J. It was not until Chy requested a second time that the group acceded. petitioner.R.00) PESOS. petitioner entered a not guilty plea. vs. club and maul one Manuel K.m. on September 29. Act No.4On February 10. petitioner ordered Esquibel to call on Chy who. the Court renders judgment: 1) Finding AMADO GARCIA guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of HOMICIDE defined and penalized by Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code and after applying in his favor the provisions of the Indeterminate Sentence Law. and Armando Foz had a drinking spree at the apartment unit of Bogie Tacuboy.20At this point. attack.921 votes. the latter approached petitioner who suddenly punched him in the face.

Lungs. he amplifies the testimony of Dr. Jr.8 x 5. The records reveal that Judge Conrado F. Hence.. one-half (1/2) full with brownish and whitish materials and other partially digested food particles. In open court. is hereby AFFIRMED IN TOTO. Histopathological examinations show mild lymphocytic infiltration.1 cms.. dorsum of left hand. Kidneys. Cagayan.1avvphi1Stomach. we are unable to consider the petitioner’s appeal with favor. In any case. Upon careful consideration of the evidence presented by the prosecution as well as the defense in this case. or a fraction thereof. the issue is whether or not petitioner is liable for the death of Manuel Chy. lower lip. 4.No fractures noted. Instead. 2005. Coronary arteries. plus the cost of this suit. Consequently. He adds that the Court of Appeals had wrongly inferred from. Dr. knowledge and observation of ordinary men. yet. gritty. Antonio identified the immediate cause of Chy’s myocardial infarction: ATTY. Manauis inhibited from the proceedings upon motion of no less than the petitioner himself. if properly considered.00) PESOS. who testified concerning his sole culpability.00] PESOS. and THREE HUNDRED THIRTY[-]TWO THOUSAND (P332. he also had an opportunity to observe Dr. left inferior mastoid region. he implicates Armando Foz as the author of the victim’s injuries. involving mucosal surface of the upper lip on the right side.11Petitioner moved for reconsideration but his motion was denied in a Resolution dated March 13. however. lower portion of the left ear. the lower portion of the anterior wall and the inferior portion of the septum. is the fact that Judge Cipriano presided during the taking of the testimonies of Fidel Foz.17 Here. Cut sections show a reddish brown myocardium with an area of hyperemia on the whole posterior wall. Cut sections show congestion. appeal is hereby [DENIED] and the July 2. petitioner invokes a recognized exception to the rule on noninterference with the determination of the credibility of witnesses. petitioner cannot seek protection from the alleged adverse consequence his own doing might have caused.16 Neither exception applies in the instant case as would justify a departure from the established rule. The present petition was brought under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. Petitioner asserts that.5 cms. it is not unusual for a judge who did not try a case in its entirety to decide it on the basis of the records on hand. would justify a different conclusion. Brain with tortuous vessels.5 x 1. BOTH THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN NOT ACQUITTING THE PETITIONER ON THE GROUND OF REASONABLE DOUBT. Cut sections show congestion.8 cms.and burial. upper lip. The Office of the Solicitor General reiterates the trial court’s assessment of the witnesses and its conclusion that the beating of Chy was the proximate cause of his death. Such reliance does not violate substantive and procedural due process of law. thus: WHEREFORE. albeit. TUMARU: Q: You diagnose[d] the cause of death to be myocardial infarction that is because there was an occlusion in the artery that prevented the flowing of blood into the . at most.. Worth mentioning. and Alvin Pascua on rebuttal. misread and overlooked certain relevant and undisputed facts. the instant appeal of petitioner on the following grounds: I. which. Cleofas C. Antonio15 that Chy’s medical condition could have resulted in his death anytime. limited his liability to slight physical injuries. He argues that the superficial wounds sustained by Chy did not cause his death. Contusions. purplish with glistening capsule.10On appeal. Branch [9]. petitioner denied employing violence against Chy. Heart. II. Cyanotic lips and nailbeds. But while the situation obtains in this case. Even so. 2003 Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Aparri. Judge Andres Q. 2.0 x 2." IV. cannot render a valid and just decision. In his undated Memorandum. Lacerated wound..5 x 3. rather than subdue. the exception does not. It does not follow that the judge who was not present during the trial. the ends of justice. We reiterate. SO ORDERED. Judge Cipriano not only heard the evidence for the defense. III. petitioner disowns responsibility for Chy’s demise since the latter was found to have died of myocardial infarction. Histopathological examinations show pulmonary edema and hemorrhages. he admitted inflicting injuries on the deceased. No hemorrhage noted.0 cms. well preserved...)20At first.13 petitioner insists on a review of the factual findings of the trial court because the judge who penned the decision was not the same judge who heard the prosecution evidence. Cut sections show a gray periphery with reddish brown central portion with fluid oozing on pressure with some reddish frothy materials noted.21 Quite the opposite.THE APPELLATE COURT ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE RULING OF THE TRIAL COURT FINDING PETITIONER LIABLE FOR THE DEATH OF MANUEL CHY DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE CAUSE OF DEATH IS MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION.THE APPELLATE COURT ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE RULING OF THE TRIAL COURT THAT PETITIONER IS THE ONE RESPONSIBLE FOR INFLICTING THE SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES SUSTAINED BY THE DECEASED MANUEL CHY. it is opportune to reiterate that this Court is not the proper forum from which to secure a re-evaluation of factual issues. In his undated Memorandum.14At the onset. in Criminal Case No. with abundant fat adherent on its epicardial surface. 2. as loss of earning. a conscientious analysis of the records would acquaint us with the causal connection between the death of the victim and the mauling that preceded it. save where the factual findings of the trial court do not find support in the evidence on record or where the judgment appealed from was based on a misapprehension of facts. Indeed.19The Autopsy Report on the body of Manuel Chy disclosed the following injuries: POSTMORTEM FINDINGS Body embalmed.12In essence.000.0 cms. A NON-VIOLENT RELATED CAUSE OF DEATH. pleural surfaces. 2006. he challenges the credibility of Armando’s brother. 0. In support. premises considered. Cipriano took over the case after Judge Manauis recused himself from the proceedings. Further. the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in a Decision dated December 20.Myocardial Infarction. Fidel. Histopathological findings show mild fibrosis of the myocardium. Cleofas Antonio who was recalled to clarify certain points in his testimony. with the caliber of the lumen reduced by approximately thirty (30%) percent.18 He can rely on the transcripts of stenographic notes and calibrate the testimonies of witnesses in accordance with their conformity to common experience. the efficacy of a decision is not necessarily impaired by the fact that the ponente only took over from a colleague who had earlier presided over the trial.7 x 1. too. He points out that the judge who penned the decision is not the judge who received the evidence and heard the witnesses. however. shiny. Basically. THE APPELLATE COURT ERRED IN AFFIRMING THE RULING OF THE TRIAL COURT WHICH CONCLUDED THAT THE HEART FAILURE OF MANUEL CHY WAS DUE TO "FRIGHT OR SHOCK CAUSED BY THE MALTREATMENT. he could be held liable for slight physical injuries because none of the blows he inflicted on Chy was fatal. (Emphasis supplied. THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND (P300. petitioner raises questions of fact. 5. dark bluish red: 4. as moral damages. 08-1185. For us to allow petitioner relief based on this argument would be to sanction a travesty of the Rules which was designed to further. petitioner denies laying a hand on Manuel Chy. Corollarily.000. CAUSE OF DEATH: . SO ORDERED.8 cm. with color ranging from dark red to dark purple.

United States v. to fourteen (14) years and eight (8) months of reclusion temporal as maximum.30It can be reasonably inferred from the foregoing statements that the emotional strain from the beating aggravated Chy’s delicate constitution and led to his death. Petitioner is further ordered to .1/2 (P127.200. Doctor? A: Not probably the blow but the reaction sir. sir. sir. that there was less oxygen being pumped by the heart? A: Yes. a person committing a felony is responsible for all the natural and logical consequences resulting from it although the unlawful act performed is different from the one he intended. it triggered the death of the deceased.600 = P1. sir. that is. his death was hastened. Q: And because of this emotional crisis the heart palpitated so fast.229. the trial court reduced his life expectancy to 10 years. (Emphasis supplied. modify the award of damages to the heirs of Manuel Chy for his loss of earning capacity in the amount of P332.000.33 In the same vein.229. And in the absence of proof of living expenses. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law. in the actual death of the victim. However." The essential requisites for the application of this provision are: (a) the intended act is felonious. WHEREFORE. usually from progressive arteriosclerosis24 or the thickening and loss of elasticity of the arterial walls. Paguirigan also testified as follows: ATTY. Ingrained in our jurisprudence is the doctrine laid down in the case of United States v. CALASAN: Q: Could an excitement trigger a myocardial infarction? A: Excitement. 2006 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G. that [was] caused definitely by emotional crisis. the amount of moral damages should be reduced to P50. the imposable penalty should be in the minimum period.600 = 19 1/3 x P63. But. without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim. Chy was 51 years old and was earning a gross monthly income ofP10. This can result from sudden emotion in a person with an existing arteriosclerosis. the heirs of Manuel Chy should be awarded P1. in obedience to the controlling case law. reclusion temporal in its minimum period. Accordingly. does not relieve the illegal aggressor of criminal responsibility. Considering that the petitioner has in his favor the mitigating circumstance of lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong as that committed without any aggravating circumstance to offset it. in view of the victim’s delicate condition.R. a heart attack will not occur. petitioner was committing a felony when he boxed the victim and hit him with a bottle.. Q: On the part of the deceased.-CR No. Q: And definitely that caused his death. In fixing the indemnity.46 Anent moral damages. the Decision dated December 20.600 as loss of earning capacity. it could be. Antonio A. jurisprudence44 approximates net income to be 50% of the gross income. the fact that Chy was previously afflicted with a heart ailment does not alter petitioner’s liability for his death.37 Thus. natural and logical consequence of the felony that petitioner had intended to commit. Doctor? A: Yes.25 Dr. 2005 and the Resolution dated March 13. computed as follows: Net earning capacity = 2/3 x (80-51) x [P127. Q: You agree with him on that point. coronary occlusion23 is the complete obstruction of an artery of the heart. the Court adopts the formula used in People v. because of a blow given with the hand or the foot. and most likely the cause is occlusion of the blood vessels itself.36 "el que es causa de la causa es causa del mal causado" (he who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused). Cagayan RTC took judicial notice of the salary which Manuel Chy was receiving as a sheriff of the court. Brobst32 that: x x x where death results as a direct consequence of the use of illegal violence. the records are bereft of showing that the heirs of Chy submitted evidence to substantiate actual living expenses. CALASAN: Q: You said that the physical injuries will cause no crisis on the part of the victim. Said fibrosis28 or formation of fibrous tissue or scar tissue rendered the middle and thickest layer of the victim’s heart less elastic and vulnerable to coronary occlusion from sudden emotion. no previous [arteriosis] or hardening of the arteries. and (c) the unintended albeit graver wrong was primarily caused by the actor’s wrongful acts.43Branch 9 of the Aparri.)22By definition. otherwise. Rodriguez34 enunciates that: x x x although the assaulted party was previously affected by some internal malady.)26The Autopsy Report bears out that Chy has a mild fibrosis of the myocardium27 caused by a previous heart attack. Doctor? A: Yes. This causation is elucidated by the testimony of Dr. We shall.000. sir. Jessica Romero testified on direct examination relative to this point: ATTY. no previous history of myocardial [ischemia].600 We sustain the trial court’s grant of funerary expense of P200. the same is mandatory in cases of murder and homicide. Antonio testified that the deceased died because of the blow that was inflicted.000 from Chy’s salary as reasonable living expense.] considering that the patient [does] not have any previous [illness] of hypertension. (b) the resulting act is likewise a felony.39 Nevertheless. (Emphasis supplied.200)] = 2/3 x (29) x P63. could not have resulted naturally and logically.40or anywhere from twelve (12) years and one (1) day to fourteen years (14) years and eight (8) months.200 .000 as stipulated by the parties45 and civil indemnity of P50. we must appreciate as mitigating circumstance in favor of petitioner the fact that the physical injuries he inflicted on the victim.)35In this jurisdiction. For this purpose. by reason of his death. Dr. Doctor? A: It could be. (Emphasis supplied. At the time of his death. I cannot say that if the patient is normal[. Article 4(1) of the Revised Penal Code states that criminal liability shall be incurred "by any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. said condition simply mitigates his guilt in accordance with Article 13(3)38 of the Revised Penal Code.000. then excitement [cannot] cause myocardial infarction. as minimum.600 or a gross annual income of P127. Hence.29In concurrence. the mere fact that the diseased or weakened condition of the injured person contributed to his death. The inevitable conclusion then surfaces that the myocardial infarction suffered by the victim was the direct. Q: And [these] physical injuries [were] caused by the [boxing] on the mouth and[/]or hitting on the nape by a bottle? A: Yes. Since he deliberately committed an act prohibited by law.41 the trial court properly imposed upon petitioner an indeterminate penalty of ten (10) years of prisión mayor. beyond peradventure he is responsible therefor who produced the cause for such acceleration as the result of a voluntary and unlawfully inflicted injury. Malinao:42Net earning capacity = 2/3 x (80-age of x a reasonable portion of the the victim at the annual net income which time of this death) would have been received by the heirs for support. CALASAN: Q: I will repeat the question. the circumstance that petitioner did not intend so grave an evil as the death of the victim does not exempt him from criminal liability. Antonio: ATTY. Doctor? A: Yes. if. 27544 are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION in that the award of moral damages is reduced to P50. Doctor? A: Yes. sir.47 However. do you agree with his findings. the victim’s actual income at the time of death and probable life expectancy are taken into account.heart? A: That was not exactly seen at the autopsy table but it changes. sir. the hyperemic changes [in] the heart muscle were the one[s] that made us [think] or gave strong conclusion that it was myocardial infarction. so much so.000.] that is[. Dr. It also deducted P7. Q: So you agree with him. sir.31lawph!lIn this case. however. if the latter’s heart was in good condition..

Dr. on November 14. his daughter embraced and prevented him from hacking Javier.00 without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. in the amount of P12. vs. 1980. Immediately thereafter. Novaldin 1 amp. Hence. This wound was presented to me only for medico-legal examination. Exconde are as follows: Date Diagnosis 11-14-80 ADMITTED due to trismus adm. I conducted a personal survey in the area affected. residing at Barangay Anonang. FILOMENO URBANO. rural health physician of San Fabian. which was used in parrying the bolo hack. The records disclose the following facts of the case.000 as civil indemnity.indemnify the heirs of Manuel K. as maximum. 02 inhalation administered. with my secretary Perfecto Jaravata. Marcelo Javier accepted and granted forgiveness to Filomeno Urbano who shoulder (sic) all the expenses in his medical treatment. Original Records) Upon the intercession of Councilman Solis.00 for the medical expenses of Javier. The then Intermediate Appellate Court affirmed the conviction of Urbano on appeal but raised the award of indemnity to the heirs of the deceased to P30. and up to the present having been re-elected to such position in the last barangay elections on May 17. San Fabian.. as minimum to SEVENTEEN (17) years. Javier who was then unarmed ran away from Urbano but was overtaken by Urbano who hacked him again hitting Javier on the left leg with the back portion of said bolo. together with the accessories of the law. and Felipe Erfe brought Javier to his house about 50 meters away from where the incident happened. JR. Pangasinan on October 23. P200. Guillermo Padilla.M. As suggested by Corporal Torio. at DX TETANUS 1:30 AM Still having frequent muscle spasm. (p. 1980. there was a typhoon that swept Pangasinan and other places of Central Luzon including San Fabian. Dr. Javier was brought to a physician. Meneses. the two accompanied by Solis appeared before the San Fabian Police to formalize their amicable settlement. Pangasinan located at about 100 meters from the tobacco seedbed of Marcelo Javier. Urbano unsheathed his bolo (about 2 feet long. The medical findings of Dr. the additional P300. . Guillermo Padilla who conducted a medico-legal examination. married. Javier had lockjaw and was having convulsions. representing expenses for the wake and burial. in view of the nature of his penalty. 88. That after the storm.00 to Javier at the police station. inj. the water in said canals and ditches became shallow which was suitable for catching mudfishes.tion of respiration and HR after muscular spasm. councilman Felipe Solis and settled their case amicably. PMC done and cadaver brought home by rela. for they are neighbors and close relatives to each other. He was sentenced to suffer an indeterminate prison term of from TWELVE (12) YEARS of prision mayor.000. the sluice or control gates of the Bued irrigation dam which irrigates the ricefields of San Fabian were closed and/or controlled so much so that water and its flow to the canals and ditches were regulated and reduced. At about 8:00 o'clock in the morning of October 23. 1980. Upon arraignment. the trial court found Urbano guilty as charged. That during the typhoon. 1980 at exactly 4:18 p. He found the place where he stored his palay flooded with water coming from the irrigation canal nearby which had overflowed. Urbano pleaded "not guilty. Filomeno Urbano was charged with the crime of homicide before the then Circuit Criminal Court of Dagupan City. IM. The motion for new trial was based on an affidavit of Barangay Captain Menardo Soliven (Annex "A") which states: That in 1980. Sudden cessa. The appellant filed a motion for reconsideration and/or new trial. in Muntinlupa. With diffi-#35. Restless at times. (p. SO ORDERED. 87. right.229. At about 1:30 a. to indemnify the heirs of the victim. On November 15. Chy P50.m. 100. Cabugao at 4:18 P. HON.) Urbano advanced P400.00 was given to Javier at Urbano's house in the presence of barangay captain Soliven.respondents. Padilla issued a medico-legal certificate (Exhibit "C" dated September 28. 1980. and P1.m. as it was already treated by the other doctor. a town of said province. GUTIERREZ. on October 27. San Fabian.. Rizal upon finality of the decision. 1980 and found the following: 1 -Incised wound 2 inches in length at the upper portion of the lesser palmar prominence. That sometime in the first week of November. Javier was rushed to the Nazareth General Hospital in a very serious condition.000. Urbano then got angry and demanded that Javier pay for his soaked palay.tion and cardiac massage done but to no avail. Urbano went to the elevated portion of the canal to see what happened and there he saw Marcelo Javier and Emilio Erfe cutting grass. 20 years of age. Upon the advice of Solis. Pronounced dead by Dra. Third Judicial District. Original Records. 1981) which reads: TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: This is to certify that I have examined the wound of Marcelo Javier. After Javier was treated by Dr. Patrolman Torio recorded the event in the police blotter (Exhibit A). he and his companions returned to Dr.J. who did not attend to Javier but instead suggested that they go to Dr. 1980." After trial. No pronouncement as to costs. 1982. Emilio looked for barrio councilman Felipe Solis instead. San Fabian. including the handle. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. and to pay the costs. When admitted to the hospital. Marcelo Javier. As to my observation the incapacitation is from (7-9) days period. by 2 inches wide) and hacked Javier hitting him on the right palm of his hand. Mario Meneses because Padilla had no available medicine. to wit: xxx xxx xxx Entry Nr 599/27 Oct '80/103OH/ Re entry Nr 592 on page 257 both parties appeared before this Station accompanied by brgy. Urbano and Javier agreed to settle their differences.00 with costs against the appellant. On November 3. He asked them who was responsible for the opening of the irrigation canal and Javier admitted that he was the one. I was the barrio captain of Barrio Anonang. petitioner. Original Records) In an information dated April 10. (p.600 as loss of earning capacity. and promising to him and to this Office that this will never be repeated anymore and not to harbour any grudge against each other.tives. Febrile 11-15-80 Referred. He was ordered confined at the New Bilibid Prison.:This is a petition to review the decision of the then Intermediate Appellate Court which affirmed the decision of the then Circuit Criminal Court of Dagupan City finding petitioner Filomeno Urban guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of homicide. petitioner Filomeno Urbano went to his ricefield at Barangay Anonang. FOUR (4) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY of reclusion temporal. Antonio Erfe. Pangasinan. 1981. When Urbano tried to hack and inflict further injury. the Erfes together with Javier went to the police station of San Fabian to report the incident. Emilio then went to the house of Barangay Captain Menardo Soliven but not finding him there. causing a swelling on said leg. That due to the locking of the sluice or control gates of the dam leading to the canals and ditches which will bring water to the ricefields. That on November 5.000. A quarrel between them ensued. Ambo bag resuscita. Edmundo Exconde who personally attended to Javier found that the latter's serious condition was caused by tetanus toxin. 421 culty opening his mouth. Emilio Erfe. Urbano promised to pay P700. The group went to Dr. 1980. Javier died in the hospital. He noticed the presence of a healing wound in Javier's palm which could have been infected by tetanus.

. I saw the late Marcelo Javier catching fish in the shallow irrigation canals with some companions. generalized convulsive spasms. However. this petition. "that cause. that Dr. we gave due course to the petition. Respiration may be impaired by laryngospasm or tonic contraction of respiratory muscles which prevent adequate ventilation. R. but the cause of his death was due to said wound which was inflicted by the appellant. If the wound had not yet healed. a short onset time is associated with a poor prognosis. 1983 Edition. (p. (pp. hinges on whether or not there was an efficient intervening cause from the time Javier was wounded until his death which would exculpate Urbano from any liability for Javier's death. cited by plaintiffs-appellants in their brief. Reflex spasm usually occur within 24 to 72 hours of the first symptom. I came to know that said Marcelo Javier died of tetanus. under such circumstances that the person responsible for the first event should. or back and difficulty swallowing. and patients often complain of difficulty opening their mouths. It is as follows: . Hence. In a resolution dated July 16. therefore. p. Spasms are caused by sudden intensification of afferent stimuli arising in the periphery. et al. an interval referred to as the onset time. and a desperate attempt by appellant to wiggle out of the predicament he found himself in. he died from tetanus. it is impossible to conceive that the deceased would be reckless enough to work with a disabled hand. somehow got infected with tetanus However. Hence. 1181). over 80 percent of patients become symptomatic within 14 days. The criteria for severe tetanus include a short incubation time. Under these circumstances.The incubation period of tetanus. dysphagia and generalized rigidity are present.. 418). The evidence merely confirms that the wound. 1. People v. 56 SCRA 631). As the progresses. the appellate court said: The claim of appellant that there was an efficient cause which supervened from the time the deceased was wounded to the time of his death. v." Pursuant to this provision "an accused is criminally responsible for acts committed by him in violation of law and for all the natural and logical consequences resulting therefrom. CA 43 O. which increases rigidity and causes simultaneous and excessive contraction of muscles and their antagonists. but dysphagia is absent and generalized spasms are brief and mild."And more comprehensively. Moderately severe tetanus has a somewhat shorter incubation period and onset time. the lower courts ruled that Javier's death was the natural and logical consequence of Urbano's unlawful act. each having a close causal connection with its immediate predecessor." (at pp. "the proximate legal cause is that acting first and producing the injury. and without which the result would not have occurred. Appellant's allegation that the proximate cause of the victim's death was due to his own negligence in going back to work without his wound being properly healed. trismus in the commonest manifestation of tetanus and is responsible for the familiar descriptive name of lockjaw. and sustained contractions called risus sardonicus. And there is no other way by which he could be infected with tetanus except through the wound in his palm (tsn.. in natural and continuous sequence.Dr. the reaction to . produces the injury. pages 695-696 of American Jurisprudence. unbroken by any efficient intervening cause. 1981).while I was conducting survey. but ventilation remains adequate even during spasms. Thus. As in the case of the incubation period. either immediately or by setting other events in motion. The case involves the application of Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code which provides that "Criminal liability shall be incurred: (1) By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended . medically speaking. most muscles are involved to some degree. As the disease progresses. we adopted the following definition of proximate cause: xxx xxx xxx. True. A short incubation period indicates severe disease. and that Javier got infected with tetanus when after two weeks he returned to his farm and tended his tobacco plants with his bare hands exposing the wound to harmful elements like tetanus germs. Javier was rushed to the hospital in a very serious condition and that on the following day. November 15. That few days there after. Mario Meneses found no tetanus in the injury. (Harrison's Principle of Internal Medicine.. all constituting a natural and continuous chain of events. abdomen. dysphagia and rigidity and frequent prolonged.or on November l5. severe trismus. 5072. Nonspecific premonitory symptoms such as restlessness. as an ordinarily prudent and intelligent person. the final event in the chain immediately effecting the injury as a natural and probable result of the cause which first acted. l980. Medina (102 Phil. Spasms may be both painful and dangerous. minimal or inapparent stimuli produce more intense and longer lasting spasms with increasing frequency. is an afterthought. ranges from 2 to 56 days. The intensity and sequence of muscle involvement is quite variable. We look into the nature of tetanus. he was declared responsible for Javier's death. and headache are encountered occasionally.e. the time between injury and the appearance of unmistakable symptoms. but the commonest presenting complaints are pain and stiffness in the jaw. Red. Trismus is usually present. Rollo) The petitioner reiterates his position that the proximate cause of the death of Marcelo Javier was due to his own negligence.. par. Rollo) The motion was denied. As more muscles are involved. 1981 which was the 22nd day after the incident. trismus is marked. have reasonable ground to expect at the moment of his act or default that an injury to some person might probably result therefrom. Edmundo Exconde of the Nazareth General Hospital testified that the victim suffered lockjaw because of the infection of the wound with tetanus. and lately.. stiffness gives way to rigidity. Cornel 78 Phil. 33. de Bataclan. 1986. 1004-1005. only local signs and symptoms develop in the region of the injury. And the settled rule in this jurisdiction is that an accused is liable for all the consequences of his unlawful act. that the deceased did not die right away from his wound. or less. the proximate cause of the victim's death was the wound which got infected with tetanus. Said wound which was in the process of healing got infected with tetanus which ultimately caused his death.G. (Article 4. that he went to catch fish in dirty irrigation canals in the first week of November. People v. and when symptoms occur within 2 or 3 days of injury the mortality rate approaches 100 percent. 20-21. 185-186)The issue. In a small proportion of patients.P. The record is clear that Marcelo Javier was hacked by the petitioner who used a bolo as a result of which Javier suffereda 2-inch incised wound on his right palm.C. The evidence on record does not clearly show that the wound inflicted by Urbano was infected with tetanus at the time of the infliction of the wound. i.. as to when the wound was infected is not clear from the record. irritability. 5. Consequently. and an onset time of 72 hrs. and the signs and symptoms encountered depend upon the major muscle groups affected." (People v. InVda. A satisfactory definition of proximate cause is found in Volume 38.. 1981. Emphasis supplied) Therefore.. Cardenas. In fact. Oct. which was already healing at the time Javier suffered the symptoms of the fatal ailment. Hypoxia may then lead to irreversible central nervous system damage and death. Mild tetanus is characterized by an incubation period of at least 14 days and an onset time of more than 6 days. 1980. however. rigidity becomes generalized. which. that on November 14. In the vast majority. pp. 78. which covers a period of 23 days does not deserve serious consideration.

The more credible conclusion is that at the time Javier's wound was inflicted by the appellant. or on November 14. the Commission recommends the adoption of the reform under discussion. may still be civilly liable. Thus. (G. This aspect of the case calls for fuller development if the heirs of the victim are so minded. when the latter is not proved." It is just and proper that. "A prior and remote cause cannot be made the be of an action if such remote cause did nothing more than furnish the condition or give rise to the occasion by which the injury was made possible. No. in the recent case of People v. 127 SCRA 16). v. even though such injury would not have happened but for such condition or occasion. 1038). 77 Phil. However. the onset time should have been more than six days. therefore. with tetanus may have been the proximate cause of Javier's death with which the petitioner had nothing to do." (45 C. which affirmed the Decision2 dated . like lockjaw and muscle spasms. while not criminally liable. It will close up an inexhaustible source of injustice-a cause for disillusionment on the part of the innumerable persons injured or wronged. While the guilt of the accused in a criminal prosecution must be established beyond reasonable doubt. Court of Appeals. The petitioner is ACQUITTED of the crime of homicide. The rule is that the death of the victim must be the direct. however.. vs. Costs de oficio. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. It does not necessarily follow that the petitioner is also free of civil liability. Urbano and Javier used the facilities of barangay mediators to effect a compromise agreement where Javier forgave Urbano while Urbano defrayed the medical expenses of Javier. Therefore. However. Javier suffered a 2-inch incised wound on his right palm when he parried the bolo which Urbano used in hacking him. distinct and foreign to the crime. for the purposes of the imprisonment of or fine upon the accused. only a preponderance of evidence is required in a civil action for damages.:On appeal is the Decision1 dated July 30. 125) It strains the judicial mind to allow a clear aggressor to go scot free of criminal liability.H.00. (99 Phil. 931-932). Such reasoning fails to draw a clear line of demarcation between criminal liability and civil responsibility. why should the offense also be proved beyond reasonable doubt? Is not the invasion or violation of every private right to be proved only by a preponderance of evidence? Is the right of the aggrieved person any less private because the wrongful act is also punishable by the criminal law? "For these reasons. At the very least. he suffered the symptoms of tetanus. As we ruled in Manila Electric Co.00 indemnification imposed by the trial court to P30. The infection was. the civil liability of the petitioner was not thoroughly examined. and efficient cause of the injury. the instant petition is hereby GRANTED. D E C I S I O N LEONARDO-DE CASTRO. Javier. 129 SCRA 559).SO ORDERED. the offense should be proved beyond reasonable doubt. therefore. such subsequent act or condition is the proximate cause. The reason for the provisions of article 29 of the Civil Code." The respondent court increased the P12. 1980. (at p. pp. died on the second day from the onset time. the wound of Javier inflicted by the appellant was already infected by tetanus germs at the time. 1980. No. July 29. Caruncho. 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G. The two responsibilities are so different from each other that article 1813 of the present (Spanish) Civil Code reads thus: "There may be a compromise upon the civil action arising from a crime. J. This incident took place on October 23. the severe form of tetanus that killed him was not yet present. November 15. 74041.000. et al.R. Consequently. The reasoning followed is that inasmuch as the civil responsibility is derived from the criminal offense. we said: xxx xxx xxx . the records show he is guilty of inflicting slight physical injuries. If no danger existed in the condition except because of the independent cause. (People v. for failure to take necessary precautions. But for the purpose of indemnity the complaining party. Section 2(3). but the public action for the imposition of the legal penalty shall not thereby be extinguished. Plaintiff-Appellee.R.C. This settlement of minor offenses is allowed under the express provisions of Presidential Decree G. The questioned decision of the then Intermediate Appellate Court.000. and logical consequence of the wounds inflicted upon him by the accused. (Article 29. 1508. (See also People v. has been explained by the Code Commission as follows: The old rule that the acquittal of the accused in a criminal case also releases him from civil liability is one of the most serious flaws in the Philippine legal system. supra) And since we are dealing with a criminal conviction. After 22 days. however.tetanus found inside a man's body depends on the incubation period of the disease. where the acquittal was due to a reasonable doubt in the mind of the court as to the guilt of the accused. The well-settled doctrine is that a person. the proof that the accused caused the victim's death must convince a rational mind beyond reasonable doubt. ORLITO VILLACORTA. WHEREFORE. if there intervened between such prior or remote cause and the injury a distinct. Doubts are present. If. There is a likelihood that the wound was but the remote cause and its subsequent infection. he died. (Padilla v. Rellin. (People v. We must stress. unrelated. now Court of Appeals. Considering the circumstance surrounding Javier's death. The judgment of acquittal extinguishes the civil liability of the accused only when it includes a declaration thatthe facts from which the civil liability might arise did not exist. And if an independent negligent act or defective condition sets into operation the instances which result in injury because of the prior defective condition. Remoquillo. This is one of those causes where confused thinking leads to unfortunate and deplorable consequences. One is for the punishment or correction of the offender while the other is for reparation of damages suffered by the aggrieved party. 1980.J. Rogelio Ligon y Tria. 02550. however. and to determine the logical result of the distinction.R. such condition was not the proximate cause. CR. No. The following day. et al. 118). civil liability cannot be demanded. which provides that the acquittal of the accused on the ground that his guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt does not necessarily exempt him from civil liability for the same act or omission. private rights. successive. that our discussion of proximate cause and remote cause is limited to the criminal aspects of this rather unusual case. One affects the social order and the other. The medical findings. It has given use to numberless instances of miscarriage of justice. lead us to a distinct possibility that the infection of the wound by tetanus was an efficient intervening cause later or between the time Javier was wounded to the time of his death. 1987). In the case at bar. the petitioner's criminal liability in this respect was wiped out by the victim's own act. The two liabilities are separate and distinct from each other. is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. natural. his wound could have been infected by tetanus 2 or 3 or a few but not 20 to 22 days before he died. it is more medically probable that Javier should have been infected with only a mild cause of tetanus because the symptoms of tetanus appeared on the 22nd day after the hacking incident or more than 14 days after the infliction of the wound. Civil Code).. Accused-Appellant. since the indemnification was based solely on the finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt in the homicide case. Cardenas. After the hacking incident. Javier's wound could have been infected with tetanus after the hacking incident. It will correct a serious defect in our law.

who denied stabbing Cruz. Villacorta recounted that he was on his way home from work at around two o’clock in the morning of January 21. if not conclusive effect. assault and stab with the said weapon one DANILO SALVADOR CRUZ. the Court finds accused Orlito Villacorta guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay the heirs of Danilo Cruz the sum of P50. who immediately ran away after the stabbing. unlawfully and feloniously attack. by Mendeja’s own account. The bamboo stick broke and was left in Cruz’s body. 2007. Villacorta asserts that Mendeja’s account of the stabbing incident is replete with inconsistencies and incredulities. in Criminal Case No. Bagumbayan.September 22.17In this case. Matias’ testimony based on the stipulation that it would only corroborate Dr. Cruz put his arm around Villacorta’s shoulder. bleeding x x x. she was tending her sari-sari store located at C-4 Road. both Villacorta and Cruz ran in opposite directions. 2006 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC). Villacorta raised the following assignment of errors: I THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY OF THE CRIME CHARGED DESPITE THE FAILURE OF THE PROSECUTION TO PROVE HIS GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. Deverni Matias (Dr.4During trial. of Malabon. Belandres). This prompted Villacorta to box Cruz.7 Dr.8The prosecution also intended to present Dr. HE COULD ONLY BE HELD LIABLE FOR SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES. 2002. Villacorta suddenly appeared and. stabbed Cruz on the left side of Cruz’s body using a sharpened bamboo stick. thereby inflicting upon the victim serious wounds which caused his immediate death. the RTC rendered a Decision finding Villacorta guilty of murder. where he died the following day. Villacorta fled. Belandres’ testimony on Cruz dying of tetanus. IITHE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN APPRECIATING THE QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE OF TREACHERY. Upon arriving home. yet. as follows: That on or about 23rd day of January 2002.00 as civil indemnity for the death of said victim plus the costs of suit. 2002. Mendeja narrated that on January 23. there were other people who witnessed the stabbing and could have chased after Villacorta. 2002.10Villacorta. the patient developed difficulty of opening the mouth. Villacorta went home. 15In his Appellant’s Brief. Belandres was Head of the Tetanus Department at the San Lazaro Hospital. then it would have been physically improbable for Mendeja to have vividly recognized the perpetrator. Hence. manifested that it was no longer filing a supplemental brief. and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. On June 21. only Mendeja did. an Information3 was filed against Villacorta charging him with the crime of murder. as he was adopting the Appellant's Brief he filed before the Court of Appeals.000. within thirty days from receipt of notice. When Mendeja returned to her store. 2002.16Villacorta assails the credibility of Mendeja. 2002. likewise. on February 15. the Court of Appeals promulgated its Decision affirming in toto the RTC judgment of conviction against Villacorta. For its part. when affirmed by the appellate court. (3) if Cruz was stabbed so swiftly and suddenly as Mendeja described. Such determination made by the trial court proceeds from its first-hand opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses.9On September 22. While admitting that he did not personally treat Cruz. 2002. Domingo Belandres. 2002. 2008. It was Mendeja who positively identified Villacorta as the one who stabbed Cruz in the early morning of January 23. the defense presented Villacorta himself. Metro Manila. armed with a sharpened bamboo stick. and (5) Mendeja had said that the bamboo stick. after which. but the prosecution and defense agreed to dispense with Dr. We are not persuaded. Matias). 27039-MN. oddly. plus the costs of suit. When arraigned on September 9. Both Cruz and Villacorta were regular customers at Mendeja’s store. At around two o’clock in the morning. qualified by treachery. Villacorta drank coffee then went outside to buy cigarettes at a nearby store. through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG). thereby placing the trial court in the unique position to assess the witnesses' credibility and to appreciate their truthfulness. the above-named accused. an eyewitness to the stabbing incident. that Cruz died of tetanus infection secondary to stab wound. Villacorta maintains that the aforementioned inconsistencies are neither trivial nor inconsequential.5 Mendeja and Aron then brought Cruz to Tondo Medical Center. in Navotas. 2007. Villacorta pleaded not guilty. On July 30. Villacorta only found out about Cruz’s death upon his arrest on July 31. Branch 170. finding accused-appellant Orlito Villacorta (Villacorta) guilty of murder. such as: (1) instead of shouting or calling for help when Villacorta allegedly stabbed Cruz. IIIASSUMING ARGUENDO THAT THE ACCUSED COMMITTED A CRIME. 2002. Mendeja gave chase but failed to catch Villacorta. in the light of the foregoing. When Villacorta was about to leave the store. treachery and evident premeditation.00 as civil indemnity. filed its Appellee's Brief13 on October 2. Villacorta did not notice that Cruz got hurt. although she had also stated that the said bamboo stick was left embedded in Cruz’s body. 2006. Stage III. 2002. (2) while. the prosecution presented as witnesses Cristina Mendeja (Mendeja) and Dr. the alleged murder weapon. Villacorta filed his Appellant’s Brief12 on May 30. and is contrary to normal human experience. Belandres specifically described the cause of Cruz’s death in the following manner: The wound was exposed x x – spurs concerted. both the RTC and the Court of Appeals gave full faith and credence to the testimony of prosecution witness Mendeja. spastivity of the body and abdominal pain and the cause of death is hypoxic encephalopathy – neuro transmitted – due to upper G. Belandres was able to determine. it is fundamental that the determination by the trial court of the credibility of witnesses. Cruz was only brought to the San Lazaro Hospital on February 14.000. through his counsel from the Public Attorney’s Office (PAO). he was taken to the Tondo Medical Center. fails to impress the Court because persons who witness . Jr. (Dr. Diagnosed of Tetanus. honesty and candor.11 The Court of Appeals directed the PAO to file Villacorta’s brief. filed a notice of appeal to assail his conviction by the RTC. with intent to kill. while the People. while Cruz was ordering bread at Mendeja’s store. she saw her neighbor Aron removing the broken bamboo stick from Cruz’s body. did then and there willfully. Navotas. and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay the heirs of Danilo Cruz (Cruz) the sum ofP50. Mendeja attempted to run after and catch Villacorta. When Cruz sustained the stab wound on January 23. Villacorta manifested that he would no longer file a supplemental brief.I. and should engender some doubt as to his guilt. The dispositive portion of said Decision reads: WHEREFORE. (4) after the stabbing. To begin with. Dr. is accorded full weight and credit as well as great respect. without uttering a word.14 The OSG. who attended to Cruz at the San Lazaro Hospital. Immediately after the stabbing incident. The Court of Appeals rejected Villacorta’s attempts to impugn Mendeja’s testimony.6Dr. thus: Appellant’s reason for concluding that witness Mendeja’s testimony is incredible because she did not shout or call for help and instead run after the appellant. using Cruz’s medical chart and diagnosis. their conduct and attitude under grilling examination. Villacorta comes before this Court via the instant appeal. where he was treated as an out-patient. was left at her store.

Dr. he did not find any tetanus infection and that Javier could have acquired the tetanus germs when he returned to work on his farm only two (2) weeks after sustaining his injury. The Court granted Urbano’s appeal. Further. In the face of Mendeja’s positive identification of Villacorta as Cruz’s stabber. people react differently and there is no standard form of behavior when one is confronted by a shocking incident. and where no improper motive can be attributed to the witness for testifying against the accused. and where the locus criminis afforded good visibility. as affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Thus. subsequent visits by Cruz to Tondo Medical Center or any other hospital for follow-up medical treatment of his stab wound. i.20Hence. hinges on whether or not there was an efficient intervening cause from the time Javier was wounded until his death which would exculpate Urbano from any liability for Javier's death. the time between injury and the appearance of unmistakable symptoms. other persons could have run after the appellant after the stabbing incident. Urbano appealed before this Court. 1980.22 the Court was confronted with a case of very similar factual background as the one at bar. Hypoxia may then lead to irreversible central nervous system damage and death. Spasms are caused by suddenintensification of afferent stimuli arising in the periphery. on November 15. Further. we do not deviate from the foregoing factual findings of the RTC. irritability. 1980.crimes react in different ways. who attended to Javier. 2002. particularly those buying articles from the store. unbroken by any efficient intervening cause. because Javier's death was the natural and logical consequence of Urbano's unlawful act. as an exonerating justification. immediately after the stabbing. On February 14. or back and difficulty swallowing. Villacorta could only muster an uncorroborated denial. The next day. the stabbing occurred at 2:00 o’clock in the morning.19The purported inconsistencies in Mendeja’s testimony pointed out by Villacorta are on matters that have no bearing on the fundamental fact which Mendeja testified on: that Villacorta stabbed Cruz in the early morning of January 23. "Nonspecific premonitory symptoms such as restlessness. authorship of the attack can be credibly ascertained. Javier died. regresses to blatant impotence. not roaming the streets. Exconde. As in the case of the incubation period. Equally lacking in merit is appellant’s second reason which is. We look into the nature of tetanus. stiffness gives way to rigidity. Cruz was admitted to the San Lazaro Hospital for symptoms of severe tetanus infection. Both the Circuit Criminal Court and the Intermediate Appellate Court found Urbano guilty of homicide. Javier was rushed to the hospital with lockjaw and convulsions. where he died the following day. produces the injury. right in front of Mendeja’s store. it also constitutes self-serving negative evidence which cannot be accorded greater evidentiary weight than the declaration of credible witnesses who testify on affirmative matters. then her version of the story deserves much weight. 1980. but dysphagia is absent and generalized spasms are brief and mild. An Information was filed against Urbano for homicide. the other person whom she identified as Aron was left to assist the appellant who was wounded. Urbano hacked Javier with a bolo. A short incubation period indicates severe disease. however. most muscles are involved to some degree. trismus is the commonest manifestation of tetanus and is responsible for the familiar descriptive name of lockjaw. On November 14. 2002. and without which the result would not have occurred. in natural and continuous sequence. "Reflex spasm usually occur within 24 to 72 hours of the first symptoms. The proximate cause of Cruz’s death is the tetanus infection. which. "x x x the makings of a human mind are unpredictable. 2002.Trismus is usually present.18Moreover. and sustained contractions called risus sardonicus.Nevertheless. Like alibi. is inherently weak and if uncorroborated. but the commonest presenting complaints are pain and stiffness in the jaw. Villacorta was unable to present any reason or motivation for Mendeja to fabricate such a lie and falsely accuse Villacorta of stabbing Cruz on January 23. 2002. both being her friends and regular customers. and not the stab wound. Urbano alleged that when Dr. immediately after he was stabbed by Villacorta in the early morning of January 23. and headache are encountered occasionally. In fact. Meneses. We quote extensively from the ratiocination of the Court in Urbano: The issue. which increases rigidity and causes simultaneous and excessive contraction of muscles and their antagonists. minimal or inapparent stimuli produce more intense and longer lasting spasms with increasing frequency. Appellant and the victim were known to witness Mendeja. The victim was in front of the store buying bread when attacked. Even if his admission is disregarded still the evidence of record cannot support appellant’s argument. Meneses examined Javier’s wound. Denial. We have ruled time and again that where the prosecution eyewitnesswas familiar with both the victim and accused. found that Javier’s serious condition was caused by tetanus infection. As the disease progresses. 2002. trismus is marked. His [Villacorta’s] other argument that the swiftness of the stabbing incident rendered impossible or incredible the identification of the assailant cannot likewise prosper in view of his admission that he was in the store of witness Mendeja on January 23. rigidity becomes generalized. only local signs and symptoms develop in the region of the injury. and the signs and symptoms encountered depend upon the major muscle groups affected. he should only be held liable for slight physical injuries for the stab wound he inflicted upon Cruz. However. like alibi. 2002 at 2:00 o’clock in the morning and that he assaulted the victim by boxing him. During an altercation on October 23. "Mild tetanus is characterized by an incubation period of at least 14 days and an onset time of more than 6 days. As explained by witness Mendeja. a short onset time is associated with a poor prognosis. In a small proportion of patients. ."The incubation period of tetanus. In the vast majority. Cruz was rushed to and treated as an out-patient at the Tondo Medical Center.. As the disease progresses. Intermediate Appellate Court. Javier was treated by Dr. As more muscles are involved.e. and patients often complain of difficulty opening their mouths. ranges from 2 to 56 days."21In this case. a time when persons are expected to be asleep in their house. abdomen. there is merit in the argument proffered by Villacorta that in the event he is found to have indeed stabbed Cruz. therefore. or Cruz’s activities between January 23 to February 14. and when symptoms occur within 2 or 3 days of injury the mortality rate approaches 100 percent. There was light in front of the store. Moderately severe tetanus has a somewhat shorter incubation period and onset time.arguing that Javier’s own negligence was the proximate cause of his death. Respiration may be impaired by laryngospasm or tonic contraction of respiratory muscles which prevent adequate ventilation. 2002. on February 15. an interval referred to as the onset time. over 80 percent of patients become symptomatic within 14 days. witness Mendeja ran after the appellant giving her additional opportunity to identify the malefactor. Proximate cause has been defined as "that cause. In Urbano v. An opening in the store measuring 1 and ¼ meters enables the person inside to see persons outside. Spasms may be both painful and dangerous. Theprosecution did not present evidence of the emergency medical treatment Cruz received at the Tondo Medical Center. inflicting an incised wound on Javier’s hand. The intensity and sequence of muscle involvement is quite variable.

have one hundred percent (100%) mortality. there is doubt as to whether appellant had an intent to kill the victim. 931-932). the reaction to tetanus found inside a man's body depends on the incubation period of the disease. such condition was not the proximate cause. supra) And since we are dealing with a criminal conviction. "A prior and remote cause cannot be made the basis of an action if such remote cause did nothing more than furnish the condition or give rise to the occasion by which the injury was made possible.23The incubation period for tetanus infection and the length of time between the hacking incident and the manifestation of severe tetanus infection created doubts in the mind of the Court that Javier acquired the severe tetanus infection from the hacking incident. When such intent is lacking but wounds were inflicted. 1983 Edition. 77 Phil. Javier suffered a 2-inch incised wound on his right palm when he parried the bolo which Urbano used in hacking him. The inference that the intent to kill existed should not be drawn in the absence of circumstances sufficient to prove this fact beyond reasonable doubt. the offense is only slight physical injuries. it is more medically probable that Javier should have been infected with only a mild case of tetanus because the symptoms of tetanus appeared on the 22nd day after the hacking incident or more than 14 days after the infliction of the wound. In the case at bar. Thus. 1980. The following day. died on the second day from the onset time. 125)24We face the very same doubts in the instant case that compel us to set aside the conviction of Villacorta for murder. As we ruled in Manila Electric Co. The medical findings. his wound could have been infected by tetanus 2 or 3 or a few but not 20 to 22 days before he died. (People v.1âwphi1 Villacorta is guilty of slight physical injuries under Article 266(1) of the Revised Penal Code for the stab wound he inflicted upon Cruz. et al. 1038).J. Javier's wound could have been infected with tetanus after the hacking incident. and (2) the . even though such injury would not have happened but for such condition or occasion. he died. such subsequent act or condition is the proximate cause. Doubts are present. the proof that the accused caused the victim's death must convince a rational mind beyond reasonable doubt. natural. The Information specified that "accused. and logical consequence of the wounds inflicted upon him by the accused. and efficient cause of the injury. the crime is not frustrated murder but physical injuries only. Cruz was then released by the Tondo Medical Center as an out-patient. Although the charge in the instant case is for murder. assault and stab with the said weapon one DANILO SALVADOR CRUZ x x x. the Court of Appeals expressly observed the lack of evidence to prove such an intent beyond reasonable doubt. Villacorta is not totally without criminal liability. The part of the body hit is not delicate in the sense that instant death can ensue by reason of a single stab wound. If Cruz acquired severe tetanus infection from the stabbing. The onus probandi lies not on accused-appellant but on the prosecution. severe tetanus infection has a short incubation period. less than 14 days. The infection was. arising from the defense that the offended party might make." Treachery exists when an offender commits any of the crimes against persons. The instrument used is not as lethal as those made of metallic material. Remoquillo. with intent to kill. which result in injury because of the prior defective condition.27 Evidence on record shows that Cruz was brought to Tondo Medical Center for medical treatment immediately after the stabbing incident. In fact. therefore. without risk to the offender. 1004-1005. treachery and evident premeditation. generalized convulsive spasms. The criteria for severe tetanus include a short incubation time. We explained in Urbano that: The rule is that the death of the victim must be the direct. unlawfully and feloniously attack. and its subsequent infection with tetanus might have been the proximate cause of Cruz's death. (People v. There had been an interval of 22 days between the date of the stabbing and the date when Cruz was rushed to San Lazaro Hospital. namely: (1) the employment of such means of execution as would give the person attacked no opportunity for self-defense or retaliation. (Harrison's Principle of Internal Medicine. however. the severe form of tetanus that killed him was not yet present. or less. medically speaking. Ultimately. x x x. There is a likelihood that the wound was but the remote cause and its subsequent infection. After 22 days. The infection of Cruz’s stab wound by tetanus was an efficient intervening cause later or between the time Cruz was stabbed to the time of his death. 1980. if there intervened between such prior or remote cause and the injury a distinct.1avvphi1 Right after receiving medical treatment. did then and there willfully. unrelated.28We still appreciate treachery as an aggravating circumstance. If. (99 Phil. exhibiting symptoms of severe tetanus infection. it being sufficiently alleged in the Information and proved during trial.25We cannot hold Villacorta criminally liable for attempted or frustrated murder because the prosecution was not able to establish Villacorta’s intent to kill. like lockjaw and muscle spasms. 118). the wound of Javier inflicted by the appellant was already infected by tetanus germs at the time. November 15. (at p. we can only deduce that Cruz’s stab wound was merely the remote cause. therefore.. There was no other evidence to establish that Cruz was incapacitated for labor and/or required medical attendance for more than nine days. Rellin. which should be resolved in favor of the appellant. a finding of guilt for the lesser offense of slight physical injuries may be made considering that the latter offense is necessarily included in the former since the essential ingredients of slight physical injuries constitute and form part of those constituting the offense of murder. however. for failure to take necessary precautions. hitting him on the left side of the body and then immediately fled. Considering the circumstance surrounding Javier's death. As the Court noted in Urbano. Without such evidence. distinct and foreign to the crime. the onset time should have been more than six days. And if an independent negligent act or defective condition sets into operation the instances. and those that exhibit symptoms with two to three days from the injury. severe trismus. or on November 14. If no danger existed in the condition except because of the independent cause. to wit: Appellant stabbed the victim only once using a sharpened bamboo stick. Therefore. Javier. The assault was done only once. he suffered the symptoms of tetanus. pp. lead us to a distinct possibility that the infection of the wound by tetanus was an efficient intervening cause later or between the time Javier was wounded to the time of his death. successive.dysphagia and generalized rigidity are present. Consequently. Cardenas. However. The more credible conclusion is that at the time Javier's wound was inflicted by the appellant. This incident took place on October 23. armed with a sharpened bamboo stick." (45 C.26The intent must be proved in a clear and evident manner to exclude every possible doubt as to the homicidal (or murderous) intent of the aggressor. This definition sets out what must be shown by evidence to conclude that treachery existed. dysphagia and rigidity and frequent prolonged. employing means. but ventilation remains adequate even during spasms. v. with tetanus may have been the proximate cause of Javier's death with which the petitioner had nothing to do. and an onset time of 72 hrs. pp. Emphasis supplied) Therefore. methods or forms which tend directly or especially to ensure its execution. 1980. then the symptoms would have appeared a lot sooner than 22 days later.

1315907) for the killing of Ofelia Bulanan (Bulanan) and for the crime of Murder (Crim. 266. hitting her on the different parts of her body. 2002 until present time. and without provocation. and without uttering a word. Case No. but given that Villacorta has been in jail since July 31.6When the Corolla reached alongside the CRV. the essence of qualifying circumstance is the suddenness. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment. willfully shot several times with assorted firearms Ofelia Bulanan.7 Later.3Crim. is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. within five (5) days from receipt of this Decision. already way beyond his imposed sentence. in civilian clothes. 13159-07On or about March 13. who was out buying bread at Mendeja’s store. in Malapit.:This is an appeal of the Decision1 of the Court of Appeals dated 30 May 2011 in CA-G."Adriano was charged with two (2) counts of Murder. 27039-MN. armed with a sharpened bamboo stick. Nueva Ecija. Pursuant to previous jurisprudence. ROLLY ADRIANO y SAMSON. CR-HC No. and sentenced to suffer the penalty of thirty (30) days arresto menor. as well as slight physical injuries. 2007. the Director of the Bureau of Prisons is ordered to cause Villacorta’s immediate release. It was two o’clock in the morning of January 23. and moral shock suffered by the victim and his family as being a proximate result of the wrongful act.00) moral damages is appropriate for less serious. Four (4) armed men then suddenly alighted the Corolla and started shooting at the driver of the CRV.m. 2006 of the Regional Trial Court.-H. with intent to kill. During the investigation. Adriano arrived at Rivera's shop with the Corolla. an award of Five Thousand Pesos (P5. and to inform this Court. we can sentence Villacorta with imprisonment anywhere within arresto menor in the maximum period. No. The penalty of arresto menor spans from one (1) day to thirty (30) days. Consequently. and Cruz. surprise and the lack of expectation that the attack will take place. resulting in her death to the damage of her heirs. a maroon Honda CRV (CRY) with plate no. willfully shot several times with assorted firearms Danilo Cabiedes. treachery and abuse of superior strength.32 With the aggravating circumstance of treachery.30Both the RTC and the Court of Appeals found that treachery was duly proven in this case. heading towards the same direction. overtook them and the car in front of them. CR. Cruz. resulting in his death to the damage of his heirs. An award requires no proof of pecuniary loss. CTL 957. San Isidro. with intent to kill. i. Article 266(1) of the Revised Penal Code provides: ART. who was later identified as Cabiedes. Accused. was hit by a stray bullet.8In examining the crime scene. conniving together.C.e.33WHEREFORE. The two (2) sets of Information read: Crim. treachery may still be appreciated since what is decisive is that the execution of the attack made it impossible for the victim to defend himself or to retaliate. ROLLY ADRIANO y SAMSON. ABBA SANTIAGO y ADRIANO.5While they were at Barangay Malapit San Isidro. Police Officer 1 Matthew Garabiles (POI Garabiles) and P02 Alejandro Santos (P02 Santos). JOHN DOE AND PETER DOE. During the shooting.4Version of the Prosecution: On 13 March 2007. was attacked so suddenly. 13160-07On or about March 13. unless Villacorta is being lawfully held for another cause.000.R. who was standing near the road embankment. Case No.WHK 635. Case No. the police learned that the Corolla was registered under the name of Antonio V. – The crime of slight physical injuries shall be punished: 1. serious anxiety. the passenger on the front seat of the Corolla shot the CRV and caused the CRV to swerve and fall in the canal in the road embankment. which affirmed the Decision2 of the Regional Trial Court dated 7 April 2009. 02550. LEAN ADRIANO @ DENDEN. Villacorta suddenly appeared from nowhere. even when the victim was forewarned of the danger to his person. SO ORDERED PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. 2007. within thejurisdiction of this Honorable Court. 2002. Plaintiff and Appellee. depriving the victim of any real opportunity for self-defense while ensuring the commission of the crime without risk to the aggressor. Branch 170. D E C I S I O N PEREZ. both Cabiedes and Bulanan died from fatal gunshot wounds: Cabiedes was pronounced dead on arrival (DOA) at the Good Samaritan General Hospital due to three (3) gunshot wounds on the left side of his chest while Bulanan died on the spot after being shot in the head. moral damages may be recovered in a criminal offense resulting in physical injuries. the victim. the above-named accused. was unarmed. conniving together. San Isidro. Nueva Ecija. Cruz had his guard down and was totally unprepared for an attack on his person. 04028. then swiftly ran away. 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CAG. Villacorta is ordered to pay the heirs of the late Danilo Cruz moral damages in the sum of Five Thousand Pesos (P5. A new judgment is entered finding Villacorta GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of slight physical injuries. To reiterate. Pampanga. of Malabon. Under paragraph (1). as defined and punished by Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code. a bystander. we impose upon Villacorta a straight sentence of thirty (30) days of arresto menor. 13160-07) for the killing of Danilo Cabiedes (Cabiedes) in "People of the Philippines v. around 8:00 o'clock (sic) in the morning.R. we order his immediate release. in Criminal Case No. of the compliance with such order. Considering that Villacorta has been incarcerated well beyond the period of the penalty herein imposed. Article 2219 of the Civil Code. or shall require medical attendance during the same period. affirming the Decision dated September 22. Villacorta’s treacherous mode of attack left Cruz with no opportunity at all to defend himself or retaliate. Accused-Appellant. thus. within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. Bulanan. Rolly Adriano y Sales. Case No. By arresto menor when the offender has inflicted physical injuries which shall incapacitate the offended party from labor from one to nine days. riding a motorcycle along OlongapoGapan National Road. were on their way to Camp Olivas. unexpectedly.. a speeding blue Toyota Corolla (Corolla) with plate no. vs. in Malapit. Upon inquiry. the Nueva Ecija Provincial Crime Laboratory Office .31 The Indeterminate Sentence Law does not apply since said law excludes from its coverage cases where the penalty imposed does not exceed one (1) year.00). where he was identified by P02 Santos and PO 1 Garabiles as one of the four assailants who alighted from the passenger's seat beside the driver of the Corolla and shot Cabiedes. Rivera (Rivera). convicting accused-appellant Rolly Adriano y Santos (Adriano) for the crime of Homicide (Crim.000. The four armed men hurried back to the Corolla and immediately left the crime scene. hitting him on the different parts of his body. Nueva Ecija. and we sustain such finding. treachery and abuse of superior strength. Moral damages compensate for the mental anguish. He was immediately arrested and brought to the Provincial Special Operations Group (PSOG) headquarters in Cabanatuan City. the above-named accused. Later that day. around 8:00 o'clock (sic) in the morning. Rivera admitted that he is the owner of the Corolla but clarified that the Corolla is one of the several cars he owns in his car rental business.. stabbed Cruz at the left side of his body.29 Likewise. J. at around 8:00 a. the Decision dated July 30. PO 1 Garabiles and P02 Santos followed the Corolla but lost track of the latter.deliberate and conscious adoption of the means of execution. which he leased to Adriano. twenty-one (21) to thirty (30) days.

there being no aggravating or mitigating circumstance that attended the commission of the offense. John Doe.00. Adriano referred to the following particulars: 1) whether the culprits started shooting when the victim's vehicle was still in motion.13The other defense's witnesses. and Sixty Thousand Pesos (P60.. Death of Cabiedes The present case is a case of murder by ambush. In detail.482. the Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling of the R TC that Adriano's claim that he was in Dolores. widow of Cabiedes. he took his motorcycle to a repair shop and left it there. Br. After a while. the prosecution must establish the presence of the following elements: 1. Adriano went to the cockpit arena to watch cockfights. Felix Aguilar Sunga (Sunga). Thus did the RTC order Adriano to pay the heirs of Cabiedes the amount of P222..00 as actual damages. which can be reached by car in less than an hour. and went home and took a rest.11After resting. On the defense of alibi. likewise. Accused Rolly Adriano is also ordered to indemnify the heirs of Danilo Cabiedes in the amount of Php 50. for the death of OfeliaBulanan.000. the prosecution witnesses' positive identification of Adriano as one of the perpetrators of the crime cannot be overcome by minor inconsistencies in their testimony. as well as the testimonies of the other defense's witnesses. thrown inside the Corolla's trunk. in Crim. (5) P02 Jay Cabrera. which he rented from Rivera.00 and to pay the sum of Php 222. The other accused. In the case at bar. Adriano went to Rivera to return the Corolla.482.m.12At 8:00 p. After leaving his child at his mother's house.00) as moral damages.000.18Our Ruling In cases of murder. The killing is not parricide or infanticide. at about 6:00 a.000. Sunga. Pampanga. he was at his house in Dolores. in Barangay Malapit. he is further sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty of imprisonment from Eight (8) years and One (1) day of prision mayor medium. And finding ROLLY ADRIANO also guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Homicide. Lean Adriano alias "Denden. Lucita Tapnio (Tapnio). 13159-07 and 13160-07 is AFFIRMED subject to the Modification that the award of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50. The decision of the Regional Trial Court of Gapan City. and (3) the attendance of treachery as a qualifying aggravating circumstance and use of firearms and abuse of superior strength as generic aggravating circumstances. In ambush. the appeal is DENIED. he met his brother-in-law.45 caliber firearm. at the time of the incident. the Accused-Appellant is ORDERED to pay the heirs of Danilo Cabiedes the amount of Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (Php75. SO ORDERED.00) for the parts and service repair of the CRV. 3) the identity of the culprit who triggered the fatal shot. as minimum. (2) Sixty Thousand Pesos (P60.00) as moral damages.00) as funeral expenses.recovered one (1) deformed fired bullet from a . Danilo Dizon (Dizon). Sunga. and brought to a place where he was tortured.000. Nueva Ecija. contrary to the allegations of the defense. and 6) the precise minutes of the shooting incident. On the other hand. he met with Garcia to get the Corolla back. he went back home.9Version of the Defense Adriano testified that on 13 March 2007. for the death of Danilo Cabiedes.00) as expenses for the food served during the burial. methods. 36. 2. (6) P03 Antonio dela Cruz.m. Ruben Mallari (Mallari). After dropping Garcia off.000.The Court of Appeals rejected Adriano's attempt to becloud the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. Magalang. Nueva Ecija. After the fights. Pampanga was official business.00) as groceries used and served during the wake. Sebastian. The RTC found as proven the assessment of damages against the accused. That a person was killed. Pampanga at the time of the incident does not convince because it was not impossible for Adriano to be physically present at the crime scene. where he was arrested by police officers. the RTC convicted Adriano. or forms in the . That the accused killed him. (4) SP02 Alejandro Eduardo. the prosecution has established the concurrence of the elements of murder: (1) the fact of death of Cabiedes and Bulanan. After having coffee in Mallari' s house. Adriano contended that the RTC erred when it gave credence to the testimony of the prosecution witnesses which are inconsistent and contradictory. Adriano went to the house of his friend. and Dizon as witnesses. According to the Court of Appeals. Mallari. and Peter Doe remained at large.000.000.m. Adriano alleged that the R TC erred when it failed to appreciate his defense of alibi.000. he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.. who borrowed the Corolla from him.16On appeal to the Court of Appeals. as charged. After doing the laundry. Magalang.00) as civil indemnity to the heirs of Danilo Cabiedes is INCREASED to Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos(Php75. to Seventeen (17) years and Four (4) months of reclusion temporal medium. to ask for a lighter spring needed to repair his motorcycle. as charged. The RTC rejected Adriano's defense of alibi on the ground that it was not supported by clear and convincing evidence.00 based on the following: (1) One Hundred Thousand Pesos (Pl00. washing the clothes of his child. he received a call from a certain Boyet Garcia (Garcia). 4) whether the trip of PO1 Garabiles and P02 Santos going to Camp Olivas.14When arraigned. the RTC gave full credence to the testimony of prosecution witnesses.000.m. Paragraph 16 of Article 14 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) defines treachery as the direct employment of means. At around 5 :00 p." Abba Santiago y Adriano. and Dizon corroborated Adriano's testimony. During trial. who positively identified Adriano as one of the perpetrators of the crime. 5) the precise distance of the assailants' vehicle from that of the two (2) eyewitnesses. 4. On his way to his mother's house. (7) Adelaida Cabiedes. 3.10At about 8:00 a. Adriano went home and brought his child to his mother. Ruling of the Lower Courts After trial.. as maximum. (3) Police Senior Inspector Roger V. Adriano's alibi cannot prevail over the testimonies of credible witnesses. In addition. San Isidro. The RTC determined that the defense failed to show proof that will show or indicate that PO1 Garabiles and P02 Santos were impelled by improper motives to testify against Adriano. Also.00). Mallari. POI Garabiles and P02 Santos. (2) P02 Santos. (3) Twelve Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Two Pesos (1!12.m.45 caliber firearm and five (5) cartridges from a . and to indemnify the heirs of Ofelia Bulanan in the amount of Php 50. According to the RTC. Adriano pleaded not guilty.17 The dispositive portion of the Court of Appeals Decision reads: WHEREFORE. Adriano pickedup his motorcycle and proceeded to a store and stayed there. the prosecution presented eight (8) witnesses: (1) PO1 Garabiles.15 The dispositive portion of the R TC Decision dated 7 April 2009 reads: WHEREFORE. (2) the positive identification of Adriano as one of perpetrators of the crime. he left the cockpit at about 2:00 p. Tapnio. to eliminate any risk from any possible defenses or retaliation from the victim—19ambush exemplifies the nature of treachery. finding accused ROLLY ADRIANO guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Murder. there being no aggravating or mitigating circumstance that attended the commission of the crime. 2) which side of the vehicle did the shooters alight from. the crime is carried out to ensure that the victim is killed and at the same time. The Court of Appeals ruled that these trivial differences in fact constitute signs of veracity. where he saw his friend. and the heirs of Ofelia Bulanan the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php50. That the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art. 248. and (8) Ricky Flores.482. Case Nos. the defense presented Adriano.

There is no other logical conclusion. though fired to kill Cabiedes. may treachery be appreciated in aberratio ictus? Although Bulanan's death was by no means deliberate. we also made a distinction that "when various victims expire from separate shots. contrary to the defense's allegation that Bulanan' s death was not established. the former is absorbed in the latter. a perusal of the records would reveal that Bulanan's fact of death was duly established as the prosecution offered in evidence Bulanan's death certificate. There being no aggravating or mitigating circumstance present. The RTC . depriving the latter of any chance to defend himself and thereby ensuring its commission without risk of himself. Hilario. was in conspiracy with each other to ensure the death of Cabiedes and their safety. The felonious acts resulted in two separate and distinct crimes. Adriano. together with his co-accused. precluding all possible means of defense. the actual amount of loss by means of competent proof or the best evidence obtainable. Cabiedes was forced to swiftly turn to the right and on to the road embankment. as she was killed by a stray a bullet. without risk to the offender arising from the defense which the offended party might make.28 The doctrine in Nelmida here is apt and applicable. Adriano's original intent was to kill Cabiedes. treachery is present in the case at bar as the victims were indeed defenseless at the time of the attack. obviously. Bulanan. was. which is reclusion perpetua. precluding the unknowing victim from repelling the attack or defending himself. Nonetheless. To recover actual or compensatory damages.33 In the case at bar. Death of Bulanan We refer back to the settled facts of the case.1âwphi1 Therefore. time and again. However. Adriano had no intention to kill Bulanan. 'el que es causa de la causa es causa del mal causado '. In the case at bar.25 "[t]he fact that accused killed a person other than their intended victim is of no moment. the lower penalty should be imposed. finally falling into the canal where his CRY was trapped. While it may not have been Adriano's intention to shoot Bulanan. The Court. It is likewise uniform holding that denial and alibi will not prevail when corroborated not by credible witnesses but by the accused's relatives and friends. Flora. or he who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused. basic is the rule that the claimant must establish with a reasonable degree of certainty. Herrera24 citing People v. Magalang. we distinguished the two kinds of complex crime: compound crime. Bulanan' s death caused by the bullet fired by Adriano was the natural and direct consequence of Adriano's felonious deadly assault against Cabiedes. deliberate. Also. whether foreseen or intended or not. the accused was convicted of two separate counts of murder: for the killing of two victims.22All these circumstances indicate that the orchestrated crime was committed with the presence of the aggravating circumstances of treachery. was killed by a stray bullet. As borne by the records. the intended victim. As held in People v. Adriano is responsible for the consequences of his act of shooting Cabiedes. the defense's evidence which is composed of Adriano's relatives and friends cannot prevail over the prosecution's positive identification of Adriano as one of the perpetrators of the crime.26As regards the crime(s) committed." Evidently.execution of the crime against persons which tend directly and specially to insure its execution. we have ruled alibis like denials. causing Cabiedes to die of multiple gunshot wounds. much less. Adriano claimed he was in Dolores. the accused must convincingly prove that he was somewhere else at the time when the crime was committed and that it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene. Stray bullets. Cabiedes had no way of escaping or defending himself.45 caliber firearm. kill indiscriminately and often without warning. As we already held in People v. and Ireneo. which imposes criminal liability for the acts committed in violation of law and for all the natural and logical consequences resulting therefrom. by no means. this fact will not exculpate him. and (2) the accused consciously and deliberately adopted the particular means. methods or forms of attack employed by him.34Documentary evidence support the award of actual damages in this case. when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies. Finally. As admitted. Logically.20 The "essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by an aggressor on the unsuspecting victim. we follow the Flora doctrine. due to the presence of the aggravating circumstance of treachery. two elements must be present: (1) at the time of the attack. There is thus no complex crime. The rationale of the rule is found in the doctrine. employ any particular means of attack. In Flora. separate shots are evidenced. together with the other accused. the Nueva Ecija Provincial Crime Laboratory Office recovered six (6) cartridges of bullets from a .23 pursuant to the doctrine of aberratio ictus. The material facts in Flora are similar in the case at bar. Indeed. When the Corolla swerved into the CRV's lane. as the circumstance of abuse of superior strength concurs with treachery. San Isidro. ambushed Cabiedes by following the unsuspecting victim along the national highway and by surprise. Magalang. Ural: Criminal liability is incurred by any person committing a felony although the wrongful act be different from that which is intended. The penalty for murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code is reclusion perpetua to death.27 In the aforesaid case. and complex crime proper.32 For alibi to prosper. Adriano is guilty of the death of Bulanan under Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code. At the outset. He was at the wrong place at the wrong time. it was not physically impossible for Adriano to be at the crime scene at the time of the incident. Moreover. when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other. who was merely a bystander. we reiterate our ruling in People v. Thus. This does not indicate discharge by a single burst. Bulanan's death was random and unintentional and the method used to kill her. One or more of which. we ruled that accused-appellants should be convicted not of a complex crime but of separate crimes of two counts of murder and seven counts of attempted murder as the killing and wounding of the victims were not the result of a single act but of several acts. Barangay Malapit. Pampanga at the time of incident. In order for treachery to be properly appreciated. fired multiple shots at Cabiedes and then immediately fled the crime scene. killed Bulanan instead. One who commits an intentional felony is responsible for all the consequences which may naturally or logically result therefrom. Nelmida. Rather. we shall adhere to the prevailing jurisprudence pronounced in People v. such acts constitute separate and distinct crimes."29 not a complex crime. who are still on the loose.31On the alibi as defense. during the commission of the crime of murder. Pampanga was only less than an hour away from the crime scene. In Nelmida. the victim killed by a stray bullet. Nueva Ecija. but that the orchestrated ambush committed by Adriano. Hence. a stray bullet hit and killed Bulanan. This is the import of Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code. Adriano's claim failed to persuade.30 where the Court ruled that treachery may be appreciated in aberratio ictus. Herrera citing People v. in accordance with Article 63. Dolores."21Clearly. The means of execution employed was deliberately and consciously adopted by Adriano so as to give Cabiedes no opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate. paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code. are inherently weak and unreliable because they can easily be fabricated. we ask. which absorbs the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength. the victim was not in a position to defend himself. Emerita. qualified both killings to murder. and use of firearms.

Accused-appellant ROLLY ADRIANO y SAMSON is also found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of MURDER (Criminal Case No. Tinambac. 2002. 04028 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS. with a [piece of] wood. (Junior). then nine and eight years old. appellant received information that his sons stole a pedicab. appellant refused to believe her.000. However. Noemar and Junior had already left their residence on three separate occasions without the permission of their parents. Maria then told appellant to call a quack doctor. Seventy Five Thousand Pesos (P75. Sales (appellant) of the crimes of parricide and slight physical injuries. she told appellant that their son was already dead. NOEL T. Noemar and Junior were never physically harmed by their father. 2003.10Thereafter. his second legitimate son. The cases were then consolidated upon manifestation of the prosecution which was not objected to by the defense. a furious appellant confronted them. ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW. The Version of the ProsecutionOn September 19. However.R. 2002.35 Therefore. Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30. the appeal is DISMISSED. looked for them the next day. SALES. The Information3 for parricide contained the following allegations: That on or about the 20th day of September. During the beating Maria stayed inside the house and did not do anything as she feared for her life. we hereby increase the award of actual damages from P222. Appellee.00. she found them in the nearby Barangay of Magsaysay. When the two kids reached home at around 8 o’clock in the evening of September 20. Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30.000. Branch 63 of Calabanga. convicting appellant Noel T. while Junior fearfully followed. left their home to attend the fluvial procession of Our Lady of Peñafrancia without the permission of their parents.00) as exemplary damages. When their mother. Tinambac. appellant had to borrow money so that his wife could search for Noemar and Junior. trial ensued.482. 2005 Joint Decision2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC).482. appellant merely scolded them and told them not to repeat the misdeed since something untoward might happen to them.00 as duly supported by official receipts. 2006 Decision1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.00) as moral damages. San Vicente. Camarines Sur. unlawfully and feloniously hit [several] times. did then and there willfully. San Vicente.00) as actual damages. and Two Hundred Thirty Two Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Two Pesos {P232. the above-named accused with evident premeditation and [in] a fit of anger. and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. No..All monetary awards shall earn interest at the rate of 6o/o per annum from the date of finality until fully paid. respectively. With Noemar’s and Junior’s hands and feet tied to a coconut tree. Jr. They did not return home that night. Camarines Sur. appellant pleaded not guilty for the charges of parricide7 and slight physical injuries8 respectively. which cause[d] the death of the said victim. Noemar’s wake lasted only for a night and he was immediately buried the following day. and Twenty Five Thousand Pesos (P25. The Version of the DefensePrior to the incident. CR-HC No. Accused-appellant ROLLY ADRIANO y SAMSON is ordered to pay the heirs of DANILO CABIEDES the amount of Seventy Five Thousand Pesos (P75. Maria Litan Sales (Maria). at around or past 8:00 o’clock in the evening. Noemar Sales. Noemar Sales (Noemar) and Noel Sales. that at the time of the incident.4On the other hand. Accused-appellant ROLLY ADRIANO y SAMSON is ordered to pay the heirs of OFELIA BULANAN in the amount of the amount of Seventy Five Thousand Pesos (P75. appellant’s family was living in the conjugal home located in Barangay San Vicente. at around or past 8:00 o’clock in the evening at Brgy.00. who told them that they have to bring Noemar to a hospital. However. the different parts of the body of his legitimate eldest son. Noemar and Junior initially refused to return home but their mother prevailed upon them. She also saw injuries in the right portion of the head.000. 2003 and July 1. However. Appellant then whipped them with a stick which was later broken so that he brought his kids outside their house. When the beating finally stopped. The assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G. thereby inflicting upon him physical injuries which have required medical attendance for a period of five (5) days to the damage and prejudice of the victim’s heirs in such amount as may be proven in court. Camarines Sur in Criminal Case Nos. ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW.C. Appellant thus proceeded to take the unconscious Noemar to the junction and waited for a vehicle to take them to a hospital. 2002. His body was never examined by a doctor. the three walked back to the house with appellant assisting Noemar as the latter was staggering.computed the amount of actual damages asP222. Philippines.482. vs. measuring more or less one meter in length and one [and] a half inches in diameter. Tinambac. appellant brought his son back to their house. D E C I S I O N DEL CASTILLO. 2002 and failed to return for several days. RTC’03-789 alleges that appellant inflicted slight physical injuries in the following manner: That on or about the 20th day of September. As there was no vehicle and because another quack doctor they met at the junction told them that Noemar is already dead. As they are broke. at Brgy.000. When his sons finally arrived home at 8 o’clock in the evening of September 20. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.00) as civil indemnity.00) as exemplary damages.00) as temperate damages in lieu of actual damages. 13159-07) for the killing of OFELIA BULANAN and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. a perusal of the records reveals that the amount of award of actual damages should be P232. He left and returned with one. and. appellant scolded and hit them with a piece of wood . RTC’03-782 and RTC’03-789. 13160-07) for the killing of DANILO CABIEDES and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. that appellant voluntarily surrendered to the police. Appellant. the Information5 in Criminal Case No. Shortly thereafter. the parties agreed to stipulate that appellant is the father of the victims. he may not employ sadistic beatings and inflict fatal injuries under the guise of disciplining them. During those times. Noemar and Junior again left their home without their parents’ permission on September 16. Maria tried to revive him and when Noemar remained motionless despite her efforts. Worse. Jr. Appellantappellant ROLL Y ADRIANO y SAMSON is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of MURDER (Criminal Case No. to the damage and prejudice of the latter’s heirs in such amount as may be proven in court. Afraid of their father’s rage. the left cheek. and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. respectively.000. the above-named [accused] assault[ed] and hit with a piece of wood. one Noel Sales. J. SO ORDERED.6When arraigned on April 11. a 9-year old minor.482. Seventy Five Thousand Pesos (P75.R. brothers Noemar and Junior.00) as moral damages. [thereby] inflicting upon the latter mortal wounds. Maria noticed a crack in Noemar’s head and injuries in his legs.482. an 8-year old minor. appellant continued beating them with a thick piece of wood. 2002.:A father ought to discipline his children for committing a misdeed. 2002. Noemar collapsed and lost consciousness. Philippines.00 to P232. Camarines Sur. Each time.00) as civil indemnity.000. 01627 that affirmed the August 3. and legs of Junior. WHEREFORE.9 During the pre-trial conference.000. CR-H. This appeal seeks the reversal of the December 4.

the appellate court denied the appeal and affirmed the ruling of the trial court. When Noemar lost consciousness. However. Appellant heard him say that he wanted to sleep and saw him pointing to his chest in pain. Noemar had a weak heart that resulted in attacks consisting of loss of consciousness and froth in his mouth. P25. appellant may appeal this case to the Supreme Court via a Notice of Appeal filed before this Court. As a direct consequence of the beating suffered by the child. appellant would most likely not have ceased from his sadistic act. they waited in vain since a vehicle never came. but this was due to epilepsy. Noemar froths and passes out. Whenever he suffers from epileptic seizures. but denies battering Noemar to death. Prior to whipping his sons. Rule 124 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure. They must not exceed the parameters of their parental duty to discipline their minor children. he never complained of the whipping done to him. Appellant thus decided to just bring Noemar back to their house. A parent or guardian must exercise restraint and caution in administering the proper punishment.14Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal15 which was given due course in an Order16 dated September 21. Appellant’s claim that it was Noemar’s heart ailment that caused his death deserves no merit.18IssuesHence. who testified that Noemar indeed suffered seizures.00 as moral damages. the prosecution having proven the guilt of Noel Sales. there is no doubt appellant in beating his son Noemar and inflicting upon him physical injuries. In the crime of parricide. He contends that it was at this moment that Noemar died.20 Here. In fact. This was further aggravated by a report that his sons stole a pedicab thereby putting him in disgrace. IITHE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN NOT GIVING WEIGHT TO THE TESTIMONIES OF THE DEFENSE WITNESSES. respectively. appellant decided to bring him to a hospital in Naga City by waiting for a vehicle at the crossroad which was seven kilometers away from their house. in view of the foregoing. isAFFIRMED. is thus clear. The assailed decision dated August 3. The contentions of appellant fail to persuade. The dispositive portion of its Decision17 reads as follows: WHEREFORE. he shall be credited in the service of his sentence with the time he has undergone preventive imprisonment in accordance with and subject to the conditions provided for in Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code. His subsequent attempt to seek medical attention for Noemar as an act of repentance was nevertheless too late to save the child’s life. beyond reasonable doubt. premises considered. He claims that Noemar was conscious as they traveled to the junction where they would take a vehicle in going to a hospital. P50. 2002 as a disciplinary measure. It is incumbent upon them to remain rational and refrain from being motivated by anger in enforcing the intended punishment. it is therefore clear that appellant was motivated not by an honest desire to discipline the children for their misdeeds but by an evil intent of venting his anger.Appellant held Noemar while on their way to the crossroad and observed his difficulty in breathing. The Charge of Parricide Appellant admits beating his sons on September 20. The death of Noemar was reported to the police by the barangay captain. appellant surrendered voluntarily. face and legs. the trial court did not consider the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation against appellant since there is no proof that he planned to kill Noemar. Maria testified that Noemar suffered from epilepsy. However. RTC’03789 and sentenced to suffer the penalty of twenty (20) days of Arresto Menor in its medium period. It bears stressing that a decent and responsible parent would never subject a minor child to sadistic punishment in the guise of discipline. Criminal liability. His seizures normally occur whenever he gets hungry or when scolded. RTC’03-782 and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. not during his whipping. he noticed that Noemar was chilling and frothing. they have no money so much so that he still had to borrow so that his wife could look for the children and bring them home. Appellant attempts to evade criminal culpability by arguing that he merely intended to discipline Noemar and not to kill him. it is indispensible (a) that a felony was committed and (b) that the wrong done to the aggrieved person be the direct consequence of the crime committed by the perpetrator.000. This can reasonably be concluded from the injuries of Noemar in his head. x x x x In order that a person may be criminally liable for a felony different from that which he intended to commit. Noemar.000. But the trial court appreciated in his favor the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong.12Ruling of the Regional Trial CourtIn a Joint Decision. Besides. the amount of P50. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended. appellant recalled that Noemar was brought to a hospital more than a year before September 2002 and diagnosed with having a weak heart. SO ORDERED. Appellant denied that his son died from his beating since no parent could kill his or her child.11 Thereafter. The pupils of Noemar’s eyes were also moving up and down.00 as exemplary damages and to pay the costs. After whipping his sons in their buttocks three times. According to him. He believes that no father could kill his own son. The imposition of parental discipline on children of tender years must always be with the view of correcting their erroneous behavior. He hit Noemar and Junior simultaneously since they were side by side. He claimed that Noemar died as a result of difficulty in breathing. appellant was already furious with them because they left the family dwelling without permission and that was already preceded by three other similar incidents. accused Noel Sales is also found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of slight physical injuries in Crim. Considering that herein accused has undergone preventive imprisonment. Ruling of the Court of AppealsHowever. he expired.000. the appeal is DENIED. Maria. appellant is now before this Court with the following two-fold issues: I THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSEDAPPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIMES CHARGED. Case No. committed a felony.19Our RulingThe appeal is without merit. – Criminal liability shall be incurred: 1. A deviation will undoubtedly result in sadism. He is likewise ordered to pay the heirs of Noemar Sales. It was only when Noemar’s body slipped from the coconut tree to which he was tied and lost consciousness that appellant stopped the beating. Moreover.as thick as his index finger. Had not Noemar lost consciousness. It was then that Noemar died. Appellant’s criminal liability for the death of his son. Noemar had difficulty in breathing and complained of chest pain. But he would regain consciousness after 15 minutes. 4.00 as civil indemnity. SO ORDERED. The dispositive portion of said Joint Decision reads: WHEREFORE. Case No. This . On the other hand. RTC’03-782 and RTC’03-789 for Parricide and Slight Physical Injuries. Accused Noel Sales is likewise meted the accessory penalties as provided under the Revised Penal Code. Pursuant to Section 13(c). From these. the relevant portion of Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code states: Art. To substantiate his claim. Furthermore. However. he is found guilty of parricide in Crim. 2005 in Criminal Case Nos.13 the trial court held that the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to prove that appellant was guilty of committing the crimes of parricide and slight physical injuries in the manner described in the Informations. 2005. appellant presented his wife.

a quack doctor declared Noemar dead.000. (3) the deceased is the father. or child. Noemar’s Death Certificate22 was also presented in evidence. For his part. Maria’s testimony was also unsubstantiated by evidence. appellant himself admitted that the deceased is his child.00 in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence. a person was killed. while they were tied to a coconut tree. .Appellant adopted means to ensure the success of the savage battering of his sons. and in conformity with current policy. Appellant testified that Noemar suffered from a weak heart which resulted in his death while Maria declared that Noemar was suffering from epilepsy. or child. Rules for the application of indivisible penalties. However. Article 246 of the Revised Penal Code defines parricide as follows: Art. which could have been caused by hitting said area with a hard object such as a wooden stick and. or the legitimate spouse of accused.000.x x x In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of two indivisible penalties. His findings were (1) muscular contusions with hematoma on the right side of Junior’s face just below the eye and on both legs. Moreover. mother. These testimonies are sufficient to establish the relationship between appellant and Noemar. were beaten by their father. oral evidence of filial relationship may be considered. voluntary surrender. as testified to by Maria. as will be discussed below. there was error in appreciating the mitigating circumstance of lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong. whether legitimate or illegitimate. her husband. the latter’s testimony did not help as same was even in conflict with his testimony.00 as civil indemnity. they held a wake for Noemar the next day and then buried him the day after. Maria. Dr. their father. inside their house. even if appellant presented his wife. even if we earlier ruled that the trial court erred in considering the mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong."21 In the case at bench. Primavera answered one to . However. However. Same is sufficiently established by the positive testimonies of Maria and Junior. While Dr. – Any person who shall kill his father.declaration is self-serving and uncorroborated since it is not substantiated by evidence. were whipped by appellant. It is worth emphasizing that Noemar’s cadaver was never examined. Camarines Sur issued a death certificate indicating that Noemar died due to cardiopulmonary arrest. (2) abrasions of brownish color circling both wrist with crust formation which could have been sustained by the patient due to struggling while his hands were tied. appellant stipulated to the fact that he is the father of Noemar during the pre-trial conference and likewise made the same declaration while under oath. the same is not sufficient to prove that his death was due mainly to his poor health.23 As earlier stated.00 as moral damages. (2) the deceased is killed by the accused. Junior testified that Noemar. that appellant committed the crime of parricide. x x x x The crime of parricide is punishable by the indivisible penalties of reclusion perpetua to death. (Dr. Parricide. Noemar and his younger brother. head and legs that immediately caused his death. "Parricide is committed when: (1) a person is killed. Junior. Ursolino Primavera. the award of exemplary damages of P25. while tied to a tree. as affirmed by the appellate court. together with his brother Noemar. was beaten by their father in the head. Maria testified that on September 20.31Junior’s testimony was likewise supported by Dr. andP50. and no aggravating circumstance. He issued a Medical Certificate for his findings and testified on the same. "The mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong as that actually perpetrated cannot be appreciated where the acts employed by the accused were reasonably sufficient to produce and did actually produce the death of the victim. Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code provides in part as follows: Art. whether legitimate or illegitimate.29The Charge of Slight Physical InjuriesThe victim himself. or descendants. 246.000. This is because the exclusion of said mitigating circumstance does not result to a different penalty since the presence of only one mitigating circumstance. mother. While Noemar’s birth certificate was not presented. Because the savagery of the attack was too much for Noemar’s frail body to endure. we maintain the penalty imposed. all the elements of the crime of parricide are obtaining in this case. or a legitimate other ascendant or other descendant.27 "In addition. Junior testified that he. he lost consciousness and died from his injuries immediately after the incident.24 Maria also testified that Noemar and Junior are her sons with appellant.000. herein appellant. a Municipal Health Officer of Tinambac. Salvador Betito. all the elements of the crime of parricide are present in this case. The presentation by appellant of himself to the police officer on duty in a spontaneous manner is a manifestation of his intent "to save the authorities the trouble and expense that may be incurred for his search and capture"25 which is the essence of voluntary surrender. or his spouse. The whipping continued even outside the house but this time. We find no error in the ruling of the trial court. we also impose on all the monetary awards for damages an interest at the legal rate of 6% from the date of finality of this Decision until fully paid. Noemar suffered injuries in his face. Thereafter. or any of his ascendants. is sufficient for the imposition of reclusion perpetua as the proper prison term."28As regards the penalty. the following rules shall be observed in the application thereof: x x x x 3. When the commission of the act is attended by some mitigating circumstance and there is no aggravating circumstance. Jr. to lend credence to his contention. parricide is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death.00 should be increased toP30. which is. There is Mitigating Circumstance of Voluntary Surrender but not Lack of Intention to Commit so Grave a WrongThe trial court correctly appreciated the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender in favor of appellant since the evidence shows that he went to the police station a day after the barangay captain reported the death of Noemar. The trial court imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua when it considered the presence of the mitigating circumstances of voluntary surrender and lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong. With one mitigating circumstance. 63. Also. the brothers were tied side by side to a coconut tree while appellant delivered the lashes indiscriminately. He recalled to have been hit on his right eye and right leg and to have been examined by a physician thereafter. All the Elements of Parricide are present in the case at bench. Maria testified that her son Noemar did not regain consciousness after the severe beating he suffered from the hands of his father. which is voluntary surrender. There is likewise no doubt as to the existence of the second element that the appellant killed the deceased. Clearly. Interestingly. As to the third element. the lesser penalty shall be applied. Afterwards. He tied their wrists to a coconut tree to prevent their escape while they were battered with a stick to inflict as much pain as possible. Primavera) of Tinambac Community Hospital who examined him for physical injuries. the imposition of the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua and not the penalty of death on appellant was thus proper. there is overwhelming evidence to prove the first element. When asked how long does he think the injuries would heal. shall be guilty of parricide and shall be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. that is. 2002. with no aggravating circumstance.30 Maria corroborated her son’s testimony."26The Award of Damages and Penalty for Parricide We find proper the trial court’s award to the heirs of Noemar of the sums of P50.

Maria. This seeks to remedy the void in the Old Penal Code where: . He told Mandaya that he wanted Palangpangan to be killed because of a land dispute between them and that Mandaya should accompany the four (4) men. Pangasian.. So long as these conditions were not present. –The crime of slight physical injuries shall be punished: 1. No one was in the room when the accused fired the shots. however. Misamis Occidental and asked him to go with them to the house of Bernardina Palangpangan. Had it not been for this fact. RTC’03-782 and RTC’03-789. Pangasian.32 But if applied with medication. 4(2). In addition. Tubio and Daligdig fired at said room. petitioner. that Palangpangan was in another City and her home was then occupied by her son-in-law and his family. and (4) the consequence resulting from the intended act does not amount to a crime. an interest of 6% is imposed on all monetary awards from date of finality of this Decision until fully paid.two weeks. but due to a cause or accident other than petitioner's and his accused's own spontaneous desistance (Art. inspired by the Positivist School. 5This legal doctrine left social interests entirely unprotected. convicting Noel T. On the other hand. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property. Jorge Pangasian. the crime is possible. Sulpicio Intod. the appeal is DENIED. he would also be killed. the Regional Trial Court convicted Intod of attempted murder. One witness testified that before the five men left the premises. Petitioner and his companions were positively identified by witnesses. 1979. the act intended by the offender must be by its nature one impossible of accomplishment. Lopez Jaena. that the person conceiving the idea should have set about doing the deed. On the other hand. Lopez Jaena. WHEREFORE. The court (RTC). (2) there is intention to perform the physical act. Revised Penal Code). 9Under this article. would not amount to a crime. Mandaya and Intod. Mandaya. filed this petition for review of the decision of the Court of Appeals 1 affirming in toto the judgment of the Regional Trial Court. It turned out. and supported by medical examination. Pangasian. 16 One example is the . Hence. Legal impossibility occurs where the intended acts. 4(2). Respondent People of the Philippines argues that the crime was not impossible. To be impossible under this clause. CAMPOS. Branch 63 of Calabanga. as affirmed by the Court of Appeals.:Petitioner. desire and expectation is to perform an act in violation of the law. factual impossibility occurs when extraneous circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond his control prevent the consummation of the intended crime. Further. Thereafter. not impossible. the act performed by the offender cannot produce an offense against person or property because: (1) the commission of the offense is inherently impossible of accomplishment: or (2) the means employed is either (a) inadequate or (b) ineffectual.00. we gathered the following facts. even if completed. Misamis Occidental. the law and the courts did not hold him criminally liable. x x x x There being no mitigating or aggravating circumstance present in the commission of the crime. Petitioner seeks from this Court a modification of the judgment by holding him liable only for an impossible crime. J.C.1awphilPenalty for Slight Physical InjuriesWe likewise affirm the penalty imposed by the RTC. 6 The Revised Penal Code. would constitute a felony against person or against property. By arresto menor when the offender has inflicted physical injuries which shall incapacitate the offended party for labor from one to nine days or shall require medical attendance during the same period. holding that Petitioner was guilty of attempted murder. Ibid. (3) there is a performance of the intended physical act. 8 The rationale of Article 4(2) is to punish such criminal tendencies. that the result or end contemplated shall have been physically possible. . Mandaya pointed the location of Palangpangan's bedroom. CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY. respondent pointed out that: . The Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G. vs.. Slight Physical Injuries and maltreatment. Tubio and Daligdig. were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or ineffectual means.33We give full faith and credence to the categorical and positive testimony of Junior that he was beaten by his father and that by reason thereof he sustained injuries. the penalty shall be in its medium period. all armed with firearms. We thus find that the RTC correctly held appellant guilty of the crime of slight physical injuries. it was necessary that the execution of the act has been commenced. Sales of the crimes of parricide and slight physical injuries is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS that the award of exemplary damages is increased to P30. — Criminal Responsibility shall be incurred: xxx xxx xxx 2. not because of the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment (Art. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.000. At the instance of his companions. 266. employing appropriate means in order that his intent might become a reality. SO ORDERED SULPICIO INTOD. His testimony deserves credence especially since the same is corroborated by the testimony of his mother. the facts were sufficient to constitute an attempt and to convict Intod for attempted murder. Petitioner. otherwise. Santos Tubio and Avelino Daligdig went to Salvador Mandaya's house in Katugasan. in its Comment to the Petition. Article 266 of the Revised Penal Code which provides: ART. Camarines Sur in Criminal Case Nos. No one was hit by the gun fire. Primavera testified that the injuries sustained by Junior should heal in one week upon medication. JR. recognizes in the offender his formidability. and finally. 10That the offense cannot be produced because the commission of the offense is inherently impossible of accomplishment is the focus of this petition. 01627 that affirmed the Joint Decision of the Regional Trial Court. Branch XIV. Dr.R. The crime of murder was not consummated. 7 and now penalizes an act which were it not aimed at something quite impossible or carried out with means which prove inadequate. CR-H. the trial court correctly meted upon appellant the penalty under paragraph 1. In the morning of February 4. . citing Article 4(2) of the Revised Penal Code which provides: Art. they shouted: "We will kill you (the witness) and especially Bernardina Palangpangan and we will come back if (sic) you were not injured". finding him guilty of the crime of attempted murder. 3Article 4. 14The impossibility of killing a person already dead 15 falls in this category. Palangpangan's absence from her room on the night he and his companions riddled it with bullets made the crime inherently impossible. Thereafter. paragraph 2 is an innovation 4 of the Revised Penal Code. Petitioner. Tubio and Daligdig had a meeting with Aniceto Dumalagan. Instead. The RTC was thus correct in imposing upon appellant the penalty of twenty (20) days ofarresto menor in its medium period. Sulpicio Intod. arrived at Palangpangan's house in Katugasan. Petitioner contends that. 11 There must be either impossibility of accomplishing the intended act 12in order to qualify the act an impossible crime. Respondent alleged that there was intent. No. respondents.) Palangpangan did not sleep at her house at that time. 13 Thus: Legal impossibility would apply to those circumstances where (1) the motive. 2After trial. From the records. the injuries would heal in a week. Oroquieta City. At about 10:00 o'clock in the evening of the same day. 3. . .

17The case at bar belongs to this category. Mitchell. there is no such thing as an impossible crime.S. 19 where the accused failed to accomplish his intent to kill the victim because the latter did not pass by the place where he was lying-in wait. Again: Where the thing intended (attempted) as a crime and what is done is a sort to create alarm. In our jurisdiction. where the offense is legally impossible of accomplishment. the criminal attempt is committed. and further. . the petitioner failed to accomplish his end. It held that: The fact that the officer was not at the spot where the attacking party imagined where he was. . The lower court held the accused liable for attempt but the appellate court reversed. The law governing the matter made the act criminal if done without knowledge and consent of the warden. the offender intended to send a letter without the latter's knowledge and consent and the act was performed. The accused failed to hit him and to achieve his intent. In U. 18 the accused. The aforecited cases are the same cases which have been relied upon by Respondent to make this Court sustain the judgment of attempted murder against Petitioner. 21 defendant. which makes a person criminally liable for an act "which would be an offense against persons or property. Petitioner shoots the place where he thought his victim would be. Whereas. this court will not fashion a new nonstatutory law of criminal attempt. the Revised Penal Code. to wit: It being an accepted truth that defendant deserves punishment by reason of his criminal intent.S. although in reality. . In the Philippines.20 the court held defendant liable for attempted robbery even if there was nothing to rob. that he was arrested and prevented from committing the murder. One American case had facts almost exactly the same as this one. where the offense sought to be committed is factually impossible or accomplishment. with intent to kill. Berrigan. the impossibility of committing the offense is merely a defense to an attempt charge. and thus. is a defense which can be invoked to avoid criminal liability for an attempt. either by outside interference or because of miscalculation as to a supposed opportunity to commit the crime which fails to materialize. This is not true in the Philippines. In the case of Strokes vs. The Court convicted the accused of an attempt to kill. Justice Bishop. vs. the Code of Crimes and Criminal Procedure is silent regarding this matter. however. it only recognizes impossibility as a defense to a crime charge — that is. equally whether in the unseen depths of the pocket. the victim was in another part of the house. the court held him liable for attempted murder. etc. in the United States. However. expressly provided for impossible crimes and made the punishable. If the crime could have been committed had the circumstances been as the defendant believed them to be. . Legal impossibility. the Court held that the federal statutes did not contain such provision. the actor cannot be held liable for any crime — neither for an attempt not for an impossible crime. but as an attempt to commit a crime. The court explained that: It was no fault of Strokes that the crime was not committed. The impossibility of accomplishing the criminal intent is not merely a defense. in Article 4(2). vs. unknown to him. no one can seriously doubt that the protection of the public requires the punishment to be administered. no person could be criminally liable for an act which was not made criminal by law. following the principle of legality.. the incipient act which the law of attempt takes cognizance of is in reason committed. It is well settled principle of criminal law in this country that where the criminal result of an attempt is not accomplished simply because of an obstruction in the way of the thing to be operated upon. in other words. To restate. It only became impossible by reason of the extraneous circumstance that Lane did not go that way. State. in the United States. and where the bullet pierced the roof. therefore. It has no application to a case where it becomes impossible for the crime to be committed. at that moment. such is sufficient to make the act an impossible crime. Furthermore. the transmittal was achieved with the warden's knowledge and consent. the court quoted Mr. The community suffers from the mere alarm of crime. we cannot rely upon these decisions to resolve the issue at hand. fired at the window of victim's room thinking that the latter was inside. However. factual impossibility of the commission of the crime is not a defense. . And under Article 4. Furthermore. as suggested by the Model Penal Code and the proposed federal legislation. State. The only reason for this is that in American law. commentators and the cases generally divide the impossibility defense into two categories: legal versus factual impossibility. will render useless the provision in Article 4. impossible crimes are recognized. in said jurisdiction. However.Wilson23 the Court held that: . in short it has no application to the case when the impossibility grows out of extraneous acts not within the control of the party. the phrase "inherent impossibility" that is found in Article 4(2) of the Revised Penal Code makes no distinction between factual or physical impossibility and legal impossibility. It appears. WHEREFORE. attempt. The court convicted the accused of attempted murder. Further. . The factual situation in the case at bar present a physical impossibility which rendered the intended crime impossible of accomplishment. In disposing of this contention. It turned out.man who puts his hand in the coat pocket of another with the intention to steal the latter's wallet and finds the pocket empty. renders it no less an attempt to kill. excite apprehension that the evil. that the act is penalized. that the latter was in a different place. were it not for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment ." In that case all circumstances which prevented the consummation of the offense will be treated as an accident independent of the actor's will which is an element of attempted and frustrated felonies. aimed and fired at the spot where he thought the police officer would be. This rule of the law has application only where it is inherently impossible to commit the crime.24 the accused was indicated for attempting to smuggle letters into and out of prison. In the case of Clark vs. In this case. . is consistent with the overwhelming modern view". paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code. it said: Congress has not yet enacted a law that provides that intent plus act plus conduct constitutes the offense of attempt irrespective of legal impossibility until such time as such legislative changes in the law take place. 22InU. What it provided for were attempts of the crimes enumerated in the said Code. Instead. what was supposed to exist was really present or not. and these facts are unknown to the aggressor at the time. not as an impossible crime. on the other hand. He can be convicted of an attempt to commit the substantive crime where the elements of attempt are satisfied. the victim was not present in said place and thus. with intent to kill. it is no defense that in reality the crime was impossible of commission. intention will be carried out. In this regard. There is a difference between the Philippine and the American laws regarding the concept and appreciation of impossible crimes. It held unacceptable the contention of the state that "elimination of impossibility as a defense to a charge of criminal attempt. Lee Kong. Ubi lex non distinguit nec nos distinguere debemos. On the other hand. In disposing of the case. In People vs. but an act penalized by itself. the offender cannot escape criminal liability. To uphold the contention of respondent that the offense was Attempted Murder because the absence of Palangpangan was a supervening cause independent of the actor's will. InState vs. .

The customer wanted to know if she could issue checks payable to theaccount of Mega Foam. Ricablanca again went to petitioner’s house.00 each to Valencia and petitioner. The check was payment for Baby Aquino's purchases from Mega Foam Int'l. When he was informed by the bank that the check bounced. Petitioner.. but they could be reached through Valencia. Valenzuela Branch. Jacinto seeking the reversal of the Decision1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G. Banco De Oro Check No. Ricablanca and Valencia who then boarded petitioner's jeep and went on to Baby Aquino's factory. he merely disregarded it as he didn’t know where to find the woman who rediscounted the check. 23761 dated December 16. Petitioner and Valencia were brought to the NBI office where the Forensic Chemist found fluorescent powder on the palmar and dorsal aspects of both of their hands. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. instead of issuing the checks payable to CASH. Valencia then told Ricablanca that the check came from Baby Aquino. the petition is hereby GRANTED. merchandising and inventory clerk of Mega Foam. who was then holding the bounced BDO check. Said customer had apparently been instructed by Jacqueline Capitle to make check payments to Mega Foam payable to CASH. Ricablanca divided the money and upon returning to the jeep. gave P5. Ricablanca and petitioner met at the latter's house. Ricablanca also received a phone call from an employee of Land Bank. conspiring together and mutually helping one another. Baby Aquino said that she had already paid Mega Foam P10. Metro Manila. received a phone call sometime in the middle of July from one of their customers. and instructed Ricablanca to ask Baby Aquino to replace the check with cash. Ricablanca. It was only petitioner. but the plan did not push through. namely. Respondent. Thereafter. Petitioner.000. Petitioner. and its Resolution2 dated March 5. handed petitioner Banco De Oro (BDO) Check Number 0132649 postdated July 14. Only Ricablanca alighted from the jeep and entered the premises of Baby Aquino. 2007. The NBI filed a criminal case for qualified theft against the two and one Jane Doe who was later identified . Isabelita Aquino Milabo.000. vs. Around that time. they agreed to meet again on August 21. Joseph Dyhengco talked to Baby Aquino and was able to confirm that the latter indeed handed petitioner a BDO check for P10. steal and deposited in their own account. a neighbor and former coemployee of Jacqueline Capitle at Mega Foam. representing payment made by customer Baby Aquino to the Mega Foam Int'l.6Generoso Capitle..000. D E C I S I O N PERALTA. This showed that petitioner and Valencia handled the marked money. Branch 131. to the damage and prejudice of the latter in the aforesaid stated amount of P10. petitioner also called her on the phone to tell her that the BDO check bounced. CR No. and to pay the costs. On the agreed date. which both the RTC and the CA found to be more credible.000. with the crime of Qualified Theft. sometime in July 1997. petitioner Jacinto and Jacqueline Capitle. 2003. affirming petitioner's conviction of the crime of Qualified Theft. and 59 of the Revised Penal Code. On August 15. CONTRARY TO LAW.. reported the matter to the owner of Mega Foam. and Ricablanca went to the house of Anita Valencia. upon the advise of Mega Foam's accountant. SO ORDERED GEMMA T. and as such had free access inside the aforesaid establishment. 0132649 dated July 14. paragraph 2. with grave abuse of trust and confidence reposed upon them with intent to gain and without the knowledge and consent of the owner thereof.000. admitted depositing the subject BDO check in his bank account. However. petitioner and Valencia were arrested by NBI agents. respectively.00.R. Rowena Ricablanca. Somehow.00. We hereby hold Petitioner guilty of an impossible crime as defined and penalized in Articles 4. the above-named accused. handed over said check to Ricablanca. a former employee/collector of Mega Foam. and petitioner was then the collector of Mega Foam.PREMISES CONSIDERED. Jennifer Sanalila. being then all employees of MEGA FOAM INTERNATIONAL INC. the latter is the sister of petitioner and the former pricing. However. Petitioner. pretending that she was getting cash from Baby Aquino. Inc. allegedly committed as follows: That on or about and sometime in the month of July 1997.00 bills provided by Dyhengco were marked and dusted with fluorescent powder by the NBI.5Verification from company records showed that petitioner never remitted the subject check to Mega Foam. the cash she actually brought out from the premises was the P10.000. Thereafter. 1997 in the sum of P10.:Before us is a petition for review on certiorari filed by petitioner Gemma T.000. herein represented by JOSEPH DYHENGCO Y CO. who was looking for Generoso Capitle. 2004 denying petitioner's motion for reconsideration. unlawfully and feloniously take. Thereafter. Meanwhile. another employee of Mega Foam.00 sometime in June 1997 as payment for her purchases from Mega Foam. Valencia also told Ricablanca of a plan to take the cash and divide it equally into four: for herself. J. together with the accessory penalties provided by the law. Ricablanca then phoned accused Anita Valencia. Jacqueline Capitle decided not to go with the group because she decided to go shopping. but explained that the check came into his possession when some unknown woman arrived at his house around the first week of July 1997 to have the check rediscounted. The reason for the call was to inform Capitle that the subject BDO check deposited in his account had been dishonored. 1997 in the amount of P10. asking the latter to inform Jacqueline Capitle about the phone call from Land Bank regarding the bounced check. Ricablanca explained that she had to call and relay the message through Valencia. reveals the events that transpired to be as follows. Joseph Dyhengco. did then and there willfully. They originally intended to proceed to Baby Aquino's place to have the check replaced with cash. the check was deposited in the Land Bank account of Generoso Capitle. Anita Busog de Valencia y Rivera and Jacqueline Capitle. In the month of June 1997. Meanwhile. He parted with his cash in exchange for the check without even bothering to inquire into the identity of the woman or her address. who had been watching the whole time.000. her husband. Having in mind the social danger and degree of criminality shown by Petitioner. also known as Baby Aquino. her husband. Inc. and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court.00 marked money previously given to her by Dyhengco.3The prosecution's evidence. Ricablanca. this Court sentences him to suffer the penalty of six (6) months ofarresto mayor. Dyhengco filed a Complaint with the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and worked out an entrapment operation with its agents.00. presented as a hostile witness. Ten pieces of P1. in Kalookan City. who was tasked to pretend that she was going along with Valencia's plan. where she met petitioner and Jacqueline Capitle. JACINTO.00 cash in August 1997 as replacement for the dishonored check. the decision of respondent Court of Appeals holding Petitioner guilty of Attempted Murder is hereby MODIFIED. was charged before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Caloocan City. However. because the Capitles did not have a phone. along with two other women. the bills were given to Ricablanca. 2007. the husband of Jacqueline Capitle.4Baby Aquino further testified that.

rode the jeep of petitioner and her husband. But upon review by this Court. When they arrived at said place. both of the Revised Penal Code: (1) the taking of personal property . he was adjudged guilty only of an impossible crime as defined and penalized in paragraph 2. (3) the taking was done with intent to gain – this is presumed from the act of unlawful taking and further shown by the fact that the check was deposited to the bank account of petitioner's brother-in-law. as minimum. on December 16. asking if she (Valencia) could accompany her (Ricablanca) to the house of Baby Aquino. (c) The accused Jacqueline Capitle is acquitted. did not remit the customer's check payment to her employer and. 2.as Jacqueline Capitle. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property. (2) said property belonged to another − the check belonged to Baby Aquino. as may be gleaned from the aforementioned Articles of the Revised Penal Code. "What is this?" Then. (4) it was done without the owner’s consent – petitioner hid the fact that she had received the check payment from her employer's customer by not remitting the check to the company. Criminal Responsibility. . The defense.Criminal responsibility shall be incurred: x x x x 2. However. but requested them to wait for her in the jeep. the wife of Generoso Capitle. having in mind the social danger and the degree of criminality shown by the offender. as the intention of the accused is to gain from the thing stolen. on the day of the arrest. (2) that the act was done with evil intent. Court of Appeals9 is highly instructive and applicable to the present case. assailing the Decision and Resolution of the CA. appropriated it for herself. both of the Revised Penal Code. The trial of the three accused went its usual course and. because of the factual impossibility of producing the crime. After ten minutes. the court. no harm came to him. 2003. 1997. the NBI agents arrested them.Hence. In this case. The trial court and the CA held Intod guilty of attempted murder. in relation to Article 310. on the morning of August 21. and 3. peppered the latter’s bedroom with bullets. Pertinent portions of said provisions read as follows: Article 4(2). were it not for theinherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate to ineffectual means. intending to kill a person. (5) it was accomplished without the use of violence or intimidation against persons. Penalty to be imposed in case of failure to commit the crime because the means employed or the aims sought are impossible. as maximum. This is further bolstered by Article 309. on October 4. Article 4. Whether or not petitioner can be convicted of a crime not charged in the information. 1997. A Partial Motion for Reconsideration of the foregoing CA Decision was filed only for petitioner Gemma Tubale Jacinto. petitioner unlawfully took the postdated check belonging to Mega Foam. denied having taken the subject check and presented the following scenario. but claimed that she had stopped collecting payments from Baby Aquino for quite some time before her resignation from the company. as she was known to be a collector for the company. and was very surprised when Ricablanca placed the money on her lap and the NBI agents arrested them. Ricablanca called her up on the phone. They then met at the house of petitioner's mother. Ricablanca alighted. to SIX (6) YEARS.When the person intending to commit an offense has already performed the acts for the execution of the same but nevertheless the crime was not produced by reason of the fact that the act intended was by its nature one of impossible accomplishment or because the means employed by such person are essentially inadequate to produce the result desired by him. Valencia claims that she agreed to do so. thedispositive portion of which reads: WHEREFORE. a Decision was promulgated. The prosecution tried to establish the following pieces of evidence to constitute the elements of the crime of qualified theft defined under Article 308. SO ORDERED. thus: IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING. the present Petition for Review on Certiorari filed by petitioner alone. The Court must resolve the issue in the negative. (b) the sentence against accused Anita Valencia is reduced to 4 months arresto mayor medium. and proceeded to Baby Aquino's place. She further testified that. as it was her payment for purchases she made. Ricablanca gave her money and so she even asked. in that: (a) the sentence against accused Gemma Jacinto stands. Thus. where the law provides that the penalty to be imposed on the accused is dependent on the value of the thing stolen. and (6) it was done with grave abuse of confidence – petitioner is admittedly entrusted with the collection of payments from customers. to her surprise. which they parked outside the house of Baby Aquino. Since petitioner was going for a prenatal check-up at the Chinese General Hospital. . but the same was denied per Resolution dated March 5. in view of the foregoing. Whether or not a worthless check can be the object of theft. despite her admission during cross-examination that she did not know where Baby Aquino resided. Anita Valencia also admitted that she was the cashier of Mega Foam until she resigned on June 30. (emphasis supplied) Article 59. the personal property subject of the theft must have some value.8The petition deserves considerable thought. Ricablanca came to her mother’s house. FIVE (5) MONTHS AND ELEVEN (11) DAYS. or the means employed was either inadequate or ineffectual. but since the intended victim was not home at the time. in relation to Article 59. Petitioner admitted that she was a collector for Mega Foam until she resigned on June 30. The aspect of the inherent impossibility of accomplishing the intended crime under Article 4(2) of the Revised Penal Code was further explained by the Court in Intod10 in this wise: Under this article. the dispositive portion of which reads. on the other hand. In Intod.as shown by the fact that petitioner. Thus. instead. Ricablanca came out and. nor of force upon things – the check was voluntarily handed to petitioner by the customer. or . the act performed by the offender cannot produce an offense against persons or property because: (1) the commission of the offense is inherently impossible of accomplishment. 1997. as collector for Mega Foam. and asked that she accompany her (Ricablanca) to Baby Aquino's house. Ricablanca decided to hitch a ride with the former and her husband in their jeep going to Baby Aquino's place in Caloocan City. the decision of the trial court is MODIFIED. According to her. where she was staying at that time. 1999. She allegedly had no idea why Ricablanca asked them to wait in their jeep. shall impose upon him the penalty of arresto mayor or a fine ranging from 200 to 500 pesos. 2004. as it was subsequently dishonored. Whether or not the prosecution has proved petitioner's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. and (3) that its accomplishment was inherently impossible.7The three appealed to the CA and. the accused. the Court finds accused Gemma Tubale De Jacinto y Latosa. the RTC rendered its Decision. EIGHT (8) MONTHS AND TWENTY (20) DAYS. Anita Busog De Valencia y Rivera and Jacqueline CapitleGUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime ofQUALIFIED THEFTand each of them is hereby sentenced to suffer imprisonment of FIVE (5) YEARS. Intod v. as she had never been to said house. the requisites of an impossible crime are: (1) that the act performed would be an offense against persons or property. The issues raised in the petition are as follows: 1. It was never part of her job to collect payments from customers. SO ORDERED. the question arises on whether the crime of qualified theft was actually produced. but the same was apparently without value.

00 marked money. but gets nothing since the pocket is empty. Jacinto is found GUILTYof an IMPOSSIBLE CRIME as defined and penalized in Articles 4. are MODIFIED. Q Which arm of yours was held by Freedie Lizada? A I could not recall. SO ORDERED "Atty. Q Which side of your bed was Freedie Lizada sitting on? A I do not know. sir. sir. The Decision of the Court of Appeals. x x x x The impossibility of killing a person already dead falls in this category. sir. Petitioner Gemma T. Petitioner's evil intent cannot be denied. x x x 13From the above discussion. petitioner performed all the acts to consummate the crime of qualified theft. Q Which hand were you touched? A I do not know which hand. Q And he had his pants on. which she thought was the cash replacement for the dishonored check. Q He was holding you. once having committed all the acts of execution for theft.000. Court: Already answered. is that correct? A He was wearing a short pants. and Mega Foam had received the cash to replace the value of said dishonored check.1avvphi1 The fact that petitioner was later entrapped receiving the P5. because the check was eventually dishonored. or (2) physical impossibility of accomplishing the intended act in order to qualify the act as an impossible crime. Obviously. there can be no question that as of the time that petitioner took possession of the checkmeant for Mega Foam. he held the arms and then the legs. where were you when he held you? A I was in the bed. as the mere act of unlawfully taking the check meant for Mega Foam showed her intent to gain or be unjustly enriched. it is immaterial to the product of the felony that the offender. Q He held you first by your arms. sir. To be impossible under this clause. the fact that petitioner was caught receiving the marked money was merely corroborating evidence to strengthen proof of her intent to gain. Q What part of the body did the accused Freedie Lizada touched you? A My two arms. that prevented the crime from being produced. Atty. it was only due to the extraneous circumstance of the check being unfunded. Q When you realized that somebody was entering the room were you not afraid? A No. is that correct? A Yes. the fact that petitioner further planned to have the dishonored check replaced with cash by its issuer is a different and separate fraudulent scheme. sir. lying down. had it not been impossible of accomplishment in this case. even if completed.(2) the means employed is either (a) inadequate or (b) ineffectual. since said scheme was not included or covered by the allegations in the Information. Q You were lying down? A Yes. sir. he was naked." Elucidating further. and its Resolution dated March 5. sir. my legs and my breast. that fraudulent scheme could have been another possible source of criminal liability. thus: x x x Parsing through the statutory definition of theft under Article 308. during the time. Balaba: Q He held your arms with his two hands? A Only with one hand. the Court cannot pronounce judgment on the accused. The Court held in Valenzuela v. 2004. IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING. People12 that under the definition of theft in Article 308 of the Revised Penal Code. a man puts his hand in the coat pocket of another with the intention to steal the latter's wallet. At most.00 cash as supposed replacement for the dishonored check was no longer necessary for the consummation of the crime of qualified theft. and to pay the costs. otherwise. Since the crime of theft is not a continuing offense. Were it not for the fact that the check bounced. The circumstance of petitioner receiving the P5. Herein petitioner's case is closely akin to the above example of factual impossibility given in Intod. Balaba: Can we take a recess your honor? Court: How long will it take you to finish your cross? Atty.e. Q Which side of your body was Freedie Lizada at that time? A I cannot recall. Moreover. Q He was fully dressed at that time. I was not afraid. In this case. sir. even if he has no opportunity to dispose of the same. sir. is able or unable to freely dispose of the property stolen since the deprivation from the owner alone has already ensued from such acts of execution. sir. Balaba: Q Who was that somebody who entered the room? A My stepfather Freedie Lizada. which is a crime against property. petitioner's act of receiving the cash replacement should not be considered as a continuation of the theft." x x x x x x x when is the crime of theft produced? There would be all but certain unanimity in the position that theft is produced when there is deprivation of personal property due to its taking by one with intent to gain. The thing unlawfully taken by petitioner turned out to be absolutely worthless. or apoderamiento. after all. is that what you are trying to tell us? Fiscal Carisma: Already answered your honor. sir. he was dressed then. I cannot recall. the act intended by the offender must be by its nature one impossible of accomplishment. Balaba: We will confront the witness with so . Q Do you mean to tell us that he was holding your two arms and at the same time your legs. "there is only one operative act of execution by the actor involved in theft ─ the taking of personal property of another. x x x x x x x x x x we have. would not amount to a crime. Atty. is that what you are trying to tell us? A He held me first in my arms and then my legs. Unfortunately. respectively. she had performed all the acts to consummate the crime of theft. which is the deprivation of one’s personal property. is the element which produces the felony in its consummated stage. Therefore. Petitioner is sentenced to suffer the penalty of six (6) months of arrresto mayor. it would violate the due process clause of the Constitution. there is one apparent answer provided in the language of the law — that theft is already "produced" upon the "tak[ing of] personal property of another without the latter’s consent. at that time or a polo shirt? A He was not wearing any shirt then. Balaba: Q Your honor. is deemed complete from the moment the offender gains possession of the thing. she would have received the face value thereof. x x x x x x Unlawful taking. Q What happened when you realized that somebody entered the room. sir. i.000. x x x 11InIntod.. sir. There must be either (1) legal impossibility. and the one who entered was your stepfather. and 59 of the Revised Penal Code. dated December 16. factual impossibility occurs when extraneous circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond his control prevent the consummation of the intended crime. the petition is GRANTED. sir. If at all. Q What was the position of Freedie Lizada when he held your arms? A He was sitting on our bed. the plan to convince Baby Aquino to give cash as replacement for the check was hatched only after the check had been dishonored by the drawee bank. the Court held. sir. Freedie Lizada? A I did not mind him entering the room because I know that my brother was around but suddenly I felt thatsomebody was holding me. On the other hand. the Court went on to give an example of an offense that involved factual impossibility. 2003. Legal impossibility occurs where the intended acts. Q Was it a T-shirt that he had. held that unlawful taking. Atty. which was not rightfully hers. That the offense cannot be produced because the commission of the offense is inherently impossible of accomplishment is the focus of this petition. Viewed from that perspective. paragraph 2. a fact unknown to petitioner at the time. is of no moment. I am just trying to —Court: Proceed. sir.

Court: Q The same address? A. sir. sir. Q And what happened as you went inside your house to get some water? A I saw my stepfather removing the panty of my sister and he touched her and then he laid on top of her. In light of the evidence on record. accused-appellant is not criminally liable for consummated rape. sir. thus: "Fiscal Carisma: (continuing) Q Now."34Rossel testified on cross-examination. sir. Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code reads: "Art. sir. time and place? At that date and time? A 1252 Jose Abad Santos. Yes. sir. Q What did you do as you saw this thing being done by your stepfather to your elder sister? A I was just looking at them when he saw me. witness. sir.36The issue that now comes to fore is whether or not accused-appellant is guilty of consummated acts of lasciviousness defined in Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code or attempted rape under Article 335 of the said Code. Q When this happened. Balaba: Which hand. By using force or intimidation. so that he would go out. Q And it was at this time that you saw the accused Freedie Lizada touching your sister? A Yes. as amended in relation to the last paragraph of Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code. shall be punished by prision correccional. I was just looking.many things your honor. Acts of Lasciviousness. Q Did you not say something to the accused? A No. Balaba: Because he said that removing the hand —Fiscal Carisma: He said removing the panty. is that correct. Q Do you see your stepfather inside the courtroom now? A Yes. you saw who? You are referring to the accused Freedie Lizada? A Yes. that's why I am asking you how long will it take you to finish your cross? Atty. Q Now. sir. sir. from the refrigerator where you were taking a glass of water? A Yes. sir. Balaba: Is that panty? I'm sorry. Q So your sister was lying down when the accused removed her panty. sir. did you stay the whole afternoon outside your house? A No. Q So. Q Who. sir. Q And you took a glass of water from the refrigerator? A Yes. Balaba: Q Rather the right thigh of your sister and with his left hand removing the panty. and the other hand was holding your leg. Q You were struggling with one arm of Lizada holding your arm. sir. he shouted at me. 1998 do you recall where you were at about 3:00 o'clock? A I was outside our house. what was the accused doing with his left hand? A Removing her panty. under any of the circumstances mentioned in the preceding article. Q What hand was he touching your sister? A This hand. we believe that accused-appellant is guilty of attempted rape and not of acts of lasciviousness. Q Could you tell us. sir. 2. sir. sir. at that time? Where was your house at that date. Hence. what happened. sir. Tondo. Court: So we will be finished by 11:15. I was struggling to free myself from him."35In light of the evidence of the prosecution. sir. Q Which hand of your sister was being removed with the left hand of the accused? Court: Which? Atty. Q Were you noticed by your sister at that time?A No. Atty. (witness demonstrating) Q She was struggling — was the accused able to remove the panty? A Yes. what did you do as you were seen by your stepfather? A He scolded me. sir. Q Now. Q Where was your house again. Court Interpreter: Witness raising his right hand. sir. sir. Atty. sir. sir. the accused was touching with his right hand the left thigh of your sister —Fiscal Carisma: The right thigh. Q For what purpose did you get inside your house? A Because I was thirsty. That the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness. Court Interpreter: Witness pointing at the lower portion of the body. Q How about his left hand. but after a while he looked at the refrigerator because he might be thirsty. sir. sir. Q So. Court: Yes. on that date. you said your sister was sleeping. I was motioning to resist him. Q Will you point to him? A He is the one. on November 2. sir. is that what you are trying to tell us? A Yes. sir. the nine-year old brother of the private complainant corroborated in part his sister's testimony. Q And your sister did not call for help at that time? A No. thus: "Q So you got thirsty. do your recall where your sister Anna Lea Orillosa was? A Yes. sir. Fiscal Carisma: Q On that date. Q And all the time you were there looking with the glass of water in your hand? A Yes. That it is done under any of the following circumstances: a. did you not shout for help? A I did not ask for help."38 . Q And where was the — and the accused saw you when he was removing the panty of your sister? A Not yet. When the offended party is under 12 years of age. Atty. Court Interpreter: Witness pointing to a male person who when asked answers to the name Freedie Lizada. sir. sir. sir. sir. — Any person who shall commit any act of lasciviousness upon other persons of either sex. sir. he told me something and after that he went to the other room andslept. Q So you went to the fridge to get some water? A Yes. sir. He testified on direct examination. sir. did you see this before or after you went to the fridge to get some water? A I already got water then. or b. is that what you are trying to tell us? A No. Atty. Q So — you said the accused was touching your sister. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious. sir. your honor. which hand? Fiscal Carisma: The question is vague. Balaba: About another hour. Q And your sister all the time was trying to — was struggling to get free. you did not shout for help and you were trying to extricate yourself. Q And you were not able to extricate yourself from him? A I was not able to extricate myself. sir. Manila. Balaba: Q And which part of your sister's body was the accused touching with his right hand? Your sister's body was the accused touching with his right hand? A Her right leg. or c. and went inside the house? A Yes. Atty. it's not like that. but she was resisting. Q Where was she? A She was sleeping. Balaba: You cannot also remember which leg was held by Freedie Lizada? A I cannot recall. sir. sir. 336. time and place you said you were outside your house. sir. Q And — okay. What part of her body was touched by the accused? A Here. Q And all this time you saw the accused doing this. is that what you are telling to tell us? A Yes."33Rossel. he went — Court: You did not shout during that time? A No. the prosecution is burdened to prove the confluence of the following essential elements: "1. time and place. Q Where did you go next? A Inside. Fiscal Carisma: Q This thing that your father was — that your stepfather did to your elder sister. she was resisting. What was the position of your sister when you said the accused removed her panty? A She was lying straight. Atty."37For an accused to be convicted of acts of lasciviousness. sir. your honor.Q So the door of your sister's room was open? A Yes. sir. sir.what happened? A He suddenly went out of the room. sir. Q Removing her? A Panty. is that not correct? A Yes. sir. Mr. proceed. there was no introduction of the penis of accused-appellant into the aperture or within the pudendum of the vagina of private complainant. Q Where was this refrigerator located? A In front of the room where my sister sleeps. Balaba: Q You saw with what hand was the accused touching your sister? A Yes.

"40The first requisite of an attempted felony consists of two elements. he failed to perform all the acts of execution which should produce the crime of rape by reason of a cause other than his own spontaneous desistance. It signifies that form of immorality which has relation to moral impurity. To punish him after retreat and abandonment would be to destroy the motive for retreat and abandonment. He does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony. it is necessary that their objective be known and established or such that acts be of such nature that they themselves should obviously disclose the criminal objective necessarily intended. This Court emphasized in People vs."56It must be borne in mind. declared that for overt acts to constitute an attempted offense. lustful. By the series of his overt acts. no one can say with certainty what the intent of the accused is. that they are aimed at the consummation of the offense. however. and this is so for the reason that so long as the equivocal quality remains. Secondly. if not for his spontaneous desistance. irrespective of his declared intent. namely: "(1) That there be external acts. he is not guilty of an attempted felony. without any modifying circumstance. (2) Such external acts have direct connection with the crime intended to be committed.45 In the words of Viada."Lewd" is defined as obscene. to redress. the conduct of the accused consisting merely of acts of preparation has never ceased to be equivocal. and this is necessarily so. and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. lecherous. salvo esta. will ripen into the crime of rape. that the mind be able to cause a particular injury.53 The law does not punish him for his attempt to commit a felony. however. Si el autor de la tentativa. we held: "Applying the foregoing jurisprudence and taking into account Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code. The offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt acts. It is necessary. prefiere impedir el crimen que castigarlo. no hiere sino a pesar suyo.48 The Supreme Court of Spain. which if carried out to its complete termination following its natural course. The overt acts of accused-appellant proven by the prosecution were not mere preparatory acts.47 One perpetrating preparatory acts is not guilty of an attempt to commit a felony. The offender's act be not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance. There is no conceivable overt act to which the abandoned purpose could be attached.50 Hence. Accordingly. Although accused-appellant desisted from performing all the acts of execution however his desistance was not spontaneous as he was impelled to do so only because of the sudden and unexpected arrival of Rossel. has been injured by his act. without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the spontaneous desistance of the perpetrator. or that which is carried on a wanton manner. the overt acts must have an immediate and necessary relation to the offense. There is no damage. It is sufficient if it was the "first or some subsequent step in a direct movement towards the commission of the offense after the preparations are made. 4.43 It is necessary that the overt act should have been the ultimate step towards the consummation of the design. therefore. Accused- . en efecto.e. the penalty to be imposed on him should be an indeterminate prison term of six (6) years of prision correccional as minimum to twelve (12) years of prision mayor as maximum. 1892. if the preparatory acts constitute a consummated felony under the law.59 Accused-appellant should be meted an indeterminate penalty the minimum of which should be taken from prision correccional which has a range of from six months and one day to six years and the maximum of which shall be taken from the medium period of prision mayor which has a range of from eight years and one day to ten years. the appellant can only be convicted of attempted rape. said objective and finality to serve as ground for designation of the offense. should be encouraged to do so. a la conciencia.46Acts constitutive of an attempt to commit a felony should be distinguished from preparatory acts which consist of devising means or measures necessary for accomplishment of a desired object or end. the malefactor is guilty of such consummated offense. However..54 The rationale of the law. by the facts to which they are related. The nonperformance of all acts of execution was due to causeoraccident other than his spontaneous desistance. nor any private person.49There is persuasive authority that in offenses not consummated as the material damage is wanting. that the attempt must have a causal relation to the intended crime. the intention must be ascertained from the facts and therefore it is necessary. by the timely arrival of the victim's brother. the nature of the action intended (accion fin) cannot exactly be ascertained but the same must be inferred from the nature of the acts executed (accion medio). the character of an attempt is lost when its execution is voluntarily abandoned. in its decision of March 21. It is that quality of being equivocal that must be lacking before the act becomes one which may be said to be a commencement of the commission of the crime." The essential elements of an attempted felony are as follows: "1. more than a mere planning or preparation. by their nature. undressing and kissing his victim and lying on top of her. in order to avoid regrettable instances of injustice. Es un llamamiento al remordimiento. Lamahang51 that: "The relation existing between the facts submitted for appreciation and the offense which said facts are supposed to produce must be direct.57In light of the facts established by the prosecution. 3."55As aptly elaborated on by Wharton: "First. indecent. the policy of the law requires that the offender. and b the things connectedtherewith. se detiene. as explained by Viada: "La Ley. accused-appellant had commenced the execution of rape which. despues de haber comenzado a ejecutar el delito por actos exteriores. en el borde del abismo. accused-appellant is guilty only of attempted rape. Neither society.42 The raison d'etre for the law requiring a direct overt act is that. we believe that accused-appellant intended to have carnal knowledge of private complainant. Hence. una gracia un perdon que concede la Ley al arrepentimiento voluntario. indicating the intention to commit a particular crime. Thus. that the spontaneous desistance of a malefactor exempts him from criminal liability for the intended crime but it does not exempt him from the crime committed by him before his desistance." The penalty for attempted rape is prision mayor which is two degrees lower than reclusion perpetua."41An overt or external act is defined as some physical activity or deed. He commenced the commission of rape by removing his clothes. it is necessary that the acts of the accused must be such that. so long as he is capable of arresting an evil plan. i. by circumstances of the persons performing the same. his penis merely touched Mary Joy's private organ."52 If the malefactor does not perform all the acts of execution by reason of his spontaneous desistance.39The last paragraph of Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code reads: "There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts. por un sentimiento libre y espontaneo. However. in a majority of cases."44 The act done need not constitute the last proximate one for completion. or an overt act or before any fragment of the crime itself has been committed.58 In a case of similar factual backdrop as this case. 2. as the crime committed by the appellant is attempted rape. will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. by saving him harmless in case of such retreat before it is possible for any evil consequences to ensue.

IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING. 99171390. CHITO confided his feelings for her. occupying Room 307 with her maid.. telling her: "Gusto kita.. p. p.3The accusatory portion of the information4 dated December 17.. p.M. Branch 2. petitioner.) along A. Id). 8). xxx. Somebody was pinning her down on the bed.) Baleros Renato Jr. S/G Ferolin made the following entry in the security guard’ s logbook . 99-171391. (TSN. 1999 resolution2denying petitioner’ s motion for reconsideration.:In this petition for review on certiorari. . July 5. In Criminal Case No.. Petitioner. in Criminal Case No.. 1992. . July 5. xxx xxx xxx Joseph was already inside Room 306 at 9 o’ clock in the evening of December 12.. wearing a white t-shirt with “‘.. (TSN. 17). said acts being committed against her will and consent to her damage and prejudice..00 by way of moral damages for each count. She struggled but could not move. established the following facts: Like most of the tenants of the Celestial Marie Building (hereafter "Building". or a total amount of P200. 1993. petitioner Renato Baleros.. assisted by counsel. Accused-appellant is hereby ordered to pay private complainant Analia Orillosa the amount of P25. Jr.. To Room 310 of the Building where her classmates Christian Alcala. 99171392 and 99-171393. of December 13. . July 5. was a medical student of the University of Sto. as minimum to ten years ofprision mayor in its medium period.H.. MALOU then proceeded to seek help..00. only Joseph Bernard Africa was in the room. It was at around 3 o’ clock in the morning of December 13. pp. SO ORDERED RENATO BALEROS. while he was on duty. 3.a marking on the front of the T-shirt T M and a Greek letter (sic) ΣΦ’ and below the quoted letters the word ‘ 1946’ ‘ UST Medicine and Surgery’” (TSN. This Unit was being leased by Ansbert Co and at that time when CHITO was asking permission to enter. 13-14).000. because he glanced at the alarm clock beside the bed when he was awakened by the knock at the door ." (Exhibit "A-2") That CHITO arrived at Room 306 at 1:30 A. MALOU was awakened by the smell of chemical on a piece of cloth pressed on her face. Over the intercom. Sampaloc. S/G Ferolin initially refused [but later. Manila.. Accused-appellant is also hereby ordered to pay private complainant Analia Orillosa the amounts of P50. 1993.. 22) and she rejected him. Jr. 9) and black shorts with the brand name “Adidas” (TSN. inside Unit 307. but still I let him inter (sic) for the reason that he will be our tenant this coming summer break as he said so I let him sign it here (Sgd.. It was then when MALOU saw her bed . To prove its case. July 5.7) and requested permission to go up to Room 306. is SET ASIDE.00 by way of moral damages.. Answers to Question number 5. who was her classmate . Original Records. did then and there willfully. With this . Meanwhile. 1993... Who it was she did not. . 1992. as maximum.000. 1992.000. slept on a folding bed. p.000. Early morning of the following day.00 by way of civil indemnity and P50. p. MALOU continued fighting off her attacker by kicking him until at last her right hand got free. Tomas [UST] in 1991.. Upon arraignment on February 5. MALOU. another window inside her bedroom was now open.. 355). He ..000. the above-named accused. She wanted to scream for help but the hands covering her mouth with cloth wet with chemicals were very tight (TSN. holding her tightly. Branch 54.. . . Rommel Montes. Joseph Bernard Africa. The man let her go and MALOU went straight to the bedroom door and roused Marvilou. The assailed decision affirmed an earlier decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila.000. Another judgment is hereby rendered as follows: 1. Respondent.R. CR No. 91-101642 finding petitioner Renato Baleros. p. JR. MALOU retired at around 10:30. trial on the merits ensued. xxx by the time CHITO’ s knocking on the door woke him up. Her nightdress was stained with blue . 1991 charging petitioner with attempted rape reads as follow: That about 1:50 in the morning or sometime thereafter of 13 December 1991 in Manila and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. 17271 as reiterated in its March 31.: "0130H Baleros Renato Jr. MALOUtold S/G Ferolin that: "may pumasok sa kuarto ko pinagtangkaan ako" (Ibid. by forcefully covering the face of Martina Lourdes T. D E C I S I O N GARCIA. Marvilou. right in front of her bedroom door.M.. 1993. and.. Outside.. 2.000. 1991.00.. assails and seeks the reversal of the January 13. vs. know. In the evening of December 12.. p. accused-appellant is hereby found guilty of attempted rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended in relation to Article 6 of the said Code and is hereby meted an indeterminate penalty of from six years of prision correccional in its maximum period. Still. the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Manila. 1999 decision1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. however. xxx. 23) when he let the latter in. Accusedappellant is hereby ordered to pay to private complainant Analia Orillosa the amount of P50.. Lacson Street. was friendly until a week prior to the attack.6). Renato Alagadan and Christian Alcala. 1991. July 5. Marvilou Bebania (Marvilou).... Lutgardo Acosta and Rommel Montes were staying. He was able to fix the time of CHITO’ s arrival at 1:30 A. Her attacker had fled from her room going through the left bedroom window (Ibid. CHITO arrived at the Building at 1:30 in the early morning of December 13. Aside from the window with grills which she had originally left opened.the opportunity presented itself when she was able to grab hold of his sex organ which she then squeezed. MALOU testified that her relation with CHITO. accused-appellant is hereby found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of simple rape. accused-appellant is hereby found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of simple rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended and is hereby meted the penalty of reclusion perpetua.appellant is also liable to private complainant for moral damages in the amount of P25.. In Criminal Case No. 1993. 1991 was corroborated by Joseph Bernard Africa (Joseph). In Criminal Cases Nos. p. p.. her maid.00 by way of moral damages. p. according to S/G Ferolin. Among them were private complainant Martina Lourdes Albano (Malou). was wearing a t-shirt and shorts . the one without iron grills which leads to Room 306 of the Building (TSN. relented] . Their testimonies.. as narrated in some detail in the decision of the CA. pleaded "Not Guilty.. 22).. His upper garment was of cotton material while that at the lower portion felt smooth and satin-like (Ibid. topsy-turvy. J. mahal kita" (TSN. unlawfully and feloniously commenced the commission of rape by lying on top of her with the intention to have carnal knowledge with her but was unable to perform all the acts of execution by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. 33).. the prosecution presented thirteen (13) witnesses.. xxx xxx xxx Further. defined in Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended and is hereby meted the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count. October 9.00 by way of civil indemnity and the amount of P50. and her classmates.. y David (CHITO) guilty of attempted rape. Bernard Baptista. The only thing she had made out during their struggle was the feel of her attacker’ s clothes and weight."5 Thereafter. Albano with a piece of cloth soaked in chemical with dizzying effects. He asked CHITO to produce the required written authorization and when CHITO could not. Joseph noticed that CHITO was wearing dark-colored shorts and white T-shirt (Ibid. October 16. is a visitor of Ansbert Co who has not have (sic) a Request letter from our tenant of Unit #-306 Ansbert..

C-487-91 (Exhibit "E". Christian Alcala (Christian) recalled in Court that in the afternoon of December 13. He mentioned to the latter that something had happened and that they were not being allowed to get out of the building. p. and socks (Ibid). CONCLUSION: Exhs. 1991. Unfolding a different version of the incident. and the handkerchief he saw CHITO used at least once in December. p. .. was elongated to about 11/4 feet and appeared to be full but was closed with a zipper when Renato saw it then (Ibid.. 1991.."6 (Words in bracket added) For its part. People from the CIS came by before 8 o’ clock that same morning . 55) as he had seen the latter usually bringing it to school inside the classroom (Ibid. p.. Alagadan’ s testimony. xxx. the defense presented. 44-45) from inside their unit which they did not know was there and surrender the same to the investigators. Exh. None was in Room 310 so Joseph went to their yet another classmate. Renato Alagadan at Room 401 to see if the others were there. carrying his gray bag. ‘ F’ – One (1) black short (sic) marked ‘ ADIDAS’ . among others. 2) One (1) small white pl astic bag marked ‘ JONAS’ with the following: Exh. At that time Christian. xxx xxx xxx Later. a white t-shirt with a Taunu (sic) Sigma Phi sign (Ibid.. 112) reads in part. he and his roommates. Leslie Chambers.. Gary. While they were outside Room 310 talking with the authorities.. The forensic Chemist. Not until later that night at past 9 o’ clock in Camp Crame.Exhs. The t-shirt with CHITO’ s fraternity symbol. Bernard Baptista and Lutgardo Acosta (Gary) were called to the Building and were asked by the CIS people to look for anything not belonging to them in their Unit. pp. 1993... the defense sought to establish the following. 7). the petitioner himself. p. January 12. the CIS opened the bag and pulled out its contents.. PURPOSE OF LABORATORY EXAMINATION: To determine the presence of volatime (sic). The colored gray bag had a handle and a strap. 45). and the handkerchief (Exhibit "D-3) to be CHITO’ s because CHITO had lent the very same one to him . Christian knew right away that it belonged to CHITO (Ibid. Rommel Montes (Loyloy). Her Chemistry Report No. an underwear... Loyloy found (TSN. a handkerchief . by Bernard Baptista (Bernard). In their presence. Exh.. ‘ D’ – One (1) printed handkerchief. a volatile poison. Joseph also told CHITO to follow him to Room 310. 1991. CHITO used to wear on weekends. as culled from the same . ‘ E’ – One (1) white T-shirt marked ‘ TMZI’ . ‘ B’ . Christian recognized the t-shirt (Exhibit "D-4"). Joseph then went to MALOU’ s room and thereat was shown by Bernard the open window through which the intruder supposedly passed.... they saw the bag at the same place inside the bedroom where Renato had seen CHITO leave it.. He followed after Joseph to Unit 310. (Exhibit "C". went inside to search the Unit. pp. Joseph was finally able to talk to CHITO . Bernard. CHITO did just that. ‘ A’ . non-volatile and/or metallic poison on the above stated specimens. p. With Bernard. three (3) white T-shirts. 1991. and Renato went back to Room 310 at around 3 to 4 o’ clock that afternoon along with some CIS agents. ‘ C’ and ‘ D’ – POSITIVE to the test for chloroform. after their 3:30 class. of the Philippine National Police Crime Laboratory in Camp Crame. thus: "SPECIMEN SUBMITTED: xxx xxx xxx: 1) One (1) small white plastic bag marked ‘ UNIMART’ with the following: xxx xxx xxx Exh ‘ C’ – One (1) night dress colored salmon pink. this time. the Adidas short pants (Exhibit "D-5"). ‘ C’ and ‘ D’ contain chloroform.... xxx xxx xxx. That CHITO left his bag inside Room 310 in the morning of December 13. ‘ E’ and ‘ F’ are insufficient for further analysis. at about 6 to 6:30 in the morning of December 13. was what consisted mainly of Renato R. xxx xxx xxx. p. having acted in response to the written request of PNP Superintendent Lucas M. They likewise invited CHITO and Joseph to go with them to Camp Crame where the two (2) were questioned . When he saw the gray bag. another roommate of his.. as its main witness. however. FINDINGS: Toxicological examination conducted on the above stated specimens gave the following results: Exhs. xxx. 19-20). xxx. Managuelod dated December 13.1991 when he woke up again later to the sound of knocking at the door. Ibid.) conducted laboratory examination on the specimen collated and submitted. He denied committing the crime imputed to him or making at any time amorous advances on Malou. 6) a gray "Khumbella" bag cloth type (Ibid. 109. a volatile poison. Original Records. did Renato know what the contents of the bag were. An occupant of Room 310 . a Black Adidas short pants.

Congressman Rodolfo B. One of the CIS agents had taken it there and it was not opened up in his presence but the contents of the bag were already laid out on the table of Fiscal Abesamis who. 1991. Both were one in saying that CHITO was wearing a barong tagalog. Also taking the witness stand for the defense were petitioner’ s fraternity brothers. xxx. No one interviewed CHITO to ask his side. Sampaloc. without subsidiary imprisonment in case of . 15).7 Rommel Montes. CHITO also looked at his own watch and saw that the time was 1:30 (Ibid.M. From Room 306 of the Celestial Marie Building . . CHITO was a medical student of . socks and shoes" (TSN. 1994.. inside Room 310 at more/less 6:30 to 7 o’ clock in the morning of December 13... 25). whom MALOU was not able to identify. CHITO left the party with Robert Chan and Alberto at more or less past 1 A. nor when he dressed up at about 6 o’ clock in the morning to go to school and brought his gray bag to Room 310 (Ibid. wearing the prescribed barong tagalog over dark pants and leather shoes. being volatile.. who both testified being with CHITO in the December 12. San Juan. the sum of P50. however. He was already in his school uniform when. With Robert Chan and Alberto Leonardo.M. 1991. 26-29). CHITO and Joseph were physically examined by a certain Dr. around 6:30 A. 345).. He asked the latter why this was so and.changed to a thinner shirt and went to bed. 20). . xxx.. 19). 26). xxx xxx xxx Both CHITO and Joseph were taken to Prosecutor Abesamis who later instructed them to undergo physical examination at the Camp Crame Hospital . already about ten (10) minutes had lapsed since CHITO first arrived (Ibid. alias "Chito". 36). as Minimum to TEN (10) YEARS of Prision Mayor as Maximum.M. CHITO was told by Rommel Montes that somebody. Soon after. approached him and even commented: "Okey ang suot mo ha. arrived at their Fraternity house located at . Joseph told him that something had happened and to just go to Room 310 which CHITO did. 1994. at No. The party was conducted at the garden beside [the] swimming pool . dry clothes to change into and CHITO put on the white t-shirt with the Fraternity’ s symbol and a pair of black shorts with stripes. Jose Duran... CHITO woke up . p. p... 1991 trying to open the door of Room 306 while clad in dark short pants and white barong tagalog. 1994. . Dr. .. . among others.. he was not aware that his gray bag ever contained any black short Adidas pants (Ibid). 1991.. Dos Castillas. under cool reflection and prescinding from the foregoing. black short pants with stripe.. p. and for the accused to pay the offended party Martina Lourdes T. MALOU.. Joseph told him that the security guard was not letting anybody out of the Building . also testified seeing CHITO between the hours of 1:30 and 2:00 A.. when he and Joseph were brought before Fiscal Abesamis for inquest. and toothbrush (Ibid. pp. found the key left for him by Joseph behind the opened jalousie window and for five (5) minutes vainly tried to open the door until Rommel Montes..000. When they arrived at Camp Crame .... Albano. Manila at about 7 o’ clock in the evening of December 12.. p...M. xxx CHITO had anticipated his turn . a forensic chemistry instructor whose actual demonstration in open court showed that chloroform. was known to him being also a medical student at the UST at the time. Perla Duran... Joseph came to the room not yet dressed up. approached. "Ikaw na ang bahala diyan" Joseph immediately turned his back on CHITO and went inside the bedroom. the trial court rendered its decision10 convicting petitioner of attempted rape and accordingly sentencing him. S/G Ferolin called Unit 306 . He was included in the entourage of some fifty (50) fraternity members scheduled for a Christmas gathering at the house of their senior fraternity brother. S/G Ferolin. Original Records. CHITO went up the floor. Rommel tried to open the door of Unit 306 . . June 16. CHITO denied putting in his gray bag which he had left at Room 306 in the early evening of December 12. When two (2) CIS men came to the unit asking for Renato Baleros.. 1991 party held in Dr.. p.000. Joseph was told to dress up and the two (2) of them. It took another (5) minutes of calling out and knocking before Joseph.. p.... TWO (2) MONTHS AND ONE (1) DAY of Prision Correctional.. p. when he was in Camp Crame.. looking at his watch.. CHITO and Joseph. Jr. (Ibid.. 1994. riding on the same car going to and coming from the party and dropping the petitioner off the Celestial Marie building after the party. CHITO included. xxx. socks. 1991 and proceeded to the Building which they reached at about 1:30 A. then asked him for the key to Room 306.. 3 John Street... Alberto Leonardo and Robert Chan.. At the gate of the Building. Perla Duran confirmed lending the petitioner the pair of short pants with stripes after the dunking party held in her father’ s house. of December 13. April 25. (UST). xxx. Because of this. went to the room of MALOU and tried to rape her (TSN. sando. and was thus wearing his t-shirt and long pants when he was dunked... He still had on the same short pants given by Perla Duran from the fraternity party (TSN.decision of the appellate court: In December of 1991. He only found out for the first time that the black Adidas short pants was alluded to be among the items inside his gray bag late in the afternoon... at last answered the door. were brought to Camp Crame. with all the accessory penalties provided by law.. .. Baleros. guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of attempted rape as principal and as charged in the information and hereby sentences him to suffer an imprisonment ranging from FOUR (4) YEARS. without elaborating on it. di mo mabuksan ang pinto (Ibid. On the other hand.. the black striped short pants lent to him by Perla Duran (Exhibit "8-A". the Court finds the accused Renato D. p... 1991. underwear. evaporates in thirty (30) seconds without tearing nor staining the cloth on which it is applied. xxx. CHITO presented himself. The black Adidas short pants purportedly found in the bag. of December 13. made no effort to ask CHITO if the items thereat were his. de Guzman who told them to strip . with t-shirt inside. Duran’ s place at Greenhills. CHITO knocked and ..00. April 25... pp. at any time on December 13.... 24).00 by way of Moral and exemplary damages... CHITO . plus reasonable Attorney’ s fees of P30.. In fact. When S/G Ferolin finally let him in. At 6 o’ clock in the morning of December 13. the four (4) presidential nominees of the Fraternity. a tenant of Room 310 of the said building. xxx . Managuelod asked Joseph inside his room and talked to him for 30 minutes. he was likewise a member of the Tau Sigma Phi Fraternity . but was likewise unsuccessful.. with short pants and leather shoes at the time they parted after the party. He likewise disavowed placing said black Adidas short pants in his gray bag when he returned to the apartment at past 1:00 o’ clock in the early morning of December 13.9On December 14.8 Presented as defense expert witness was Carmelita Vargas. S/G Ferolin initially refused CHITO entry . Albano.. North Greenhills. June 16. father of MALOU. 1994.. were being dunked one by one into the pool. 1991 (TSN.. CHITO. offered each ... At the hospital. At Room 310. Telling him.. 1991 before going to the fraternity house. xxx. xxx xxx xxx CHITO had left his gray bag containing.M... He had left his gray traveling bag containing "white t-shirt. 25).. CHITO then decided to just call out to Joseph while knocking at the door. The next time that he saw it was between 8 to 9 P. 17-18) at room 306 in the afternoon of the previous day .. Again riding on Alberto’ s car and wearing "barong tagalog over a white t-shirt with the symbol TAU Sigma Phi..... thus: WHEREFORE. Col. xxx xxx xxx The CIS men looked inside the bedroom and on the windows..

17271. but his motion was denied by the CA in its equally assailed resolution of March 31. 1991. The Solicitor General maintained that petitioner. affirmed the trial court’ s judgment of conviction.16Expounding on the nature of an attempted felony. He had access to the room of MALOU as Room 307 where he slept the night over had a window which allowed ingress and egress to Room 306 where MALOU stayed. (2) When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious. 4. Though it was dark during their struggle. had commenced the performance of an act indicative of an intent or attempt to rape the victim. laboratory examination on these items and on the beddings and clothes worn by MALOU during the incident revealed that the handkerchief and MALOU’ s night dress both contained chloroform.12Petitioner is now with this Court. 3. As stated at the threshold hereof. The Solicitor General. and to pay the costs. when sufficient – Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if –a) There is more than one circumstance. This brings the Court to the issue on whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution has established beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the petitioner for the crime of attempted rape. SO ORDERED.concrete offense. competent and convincing evidence to prove the offense charged. Crimes are usually committed in secret and under condition where concealment is highly probable. the prosecution may resort to adducing circumstantial evidence to discharge its burden." Absent the unavoidable connection.R. and a white fraternity T-shirt.17 stated that "the attempt which the Penal Code punishes is that which has a logical connection to a particular. which forms part of circumstantial evidence. like the logical and natural relation of the cause and its effect.14 Section 4 of Rule 133 of the Rules of Court provides the conditions when circumstantial evidence may be sufficient for conviction. CR No. After a careful review of the facts and evidence on record in the light of applicable jurisprudence. In awarding damages in favor of the complainant despite the fact that the award was improper and unjustified absent any evidence to prove the same. 1999. A witness may identify a suspect or accused as the offender as an eyewitness to the very act of the commission of the crime. identified these garments as belonging to CHITO. this time. when taken together with the other pieces of evidence constituting an unbroken chain. rape is committed by a man who has carnal knowledge or intercourse with a woman under any of the following circumstances: (1) By using force or intimidation. the Court. In failing to appreciate in his favor the constitutional presumption of innocence and that moral certainty has not been met. rape is attempted when the offender commences the commission of rape directly by overt acts and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the crime of rape by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. he may still be able to positively identify a suspect or accused as the perpetrator of a crime as when. There are two types of positive identification. the positive identification of the petitioner forms part of circumstantial evidence. the decision appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED in toto. Christian Alcala. the basic issue in this case turns on the question on whether or not the CA erred in affirming the ruling of the RTC finding petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of attempted rape. S/G Ferolin. As it turned out. to wit: WHEREFORE. the latter is the person or one of the persons last seen with the victim immediately before and right after the commission of the crime. 2. as where the purpose of the offender in performing an act is not certain. echoing what the CA said. which is that petitioner was the intruder in question. but Joseph Bernard Africa as well confirmed that CHITO was wearing ablack "Adidas" shorts and fraternity T-shirt when he arrived at the Building/Unit 307 at 1:30 in the morning of December 13. were discovered the most incriminating evidence: the handkerchief stained with blue and wet with some kind of chemicals. In not finding that the circumstances it relied on to convict the petitioner are unreliable. meaning the nature of the act in relation to its objective is ambiguous.11Petitioner moved for reconsideration. MALOU had made out the feel of her intruder’ s apparel to be something made of cotton material on top and shorts that felt satin-smooth on the bottom. Costs against appellant. SO ORDERED. the CA. he would not have lain on top of the victim. on the contention that the CA erred .15Under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. leading directly to its realization and consummation. There may. b) The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven. speaking thru Justice Claro M. if not well-nigh impossible. Not only the Building security guard. Lamahang. Circumstantial evidence. and (3) When the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented. although a witness may not have actually witnessed the very act of commission of a crime. that which is the beginning of the execution of the offense by overt acts of the perpetrator.insolvency. 5. the prosecution of vicious felons who committed heinous crimes in secret or secluded places will be hard. and c) The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. 4. We quote with approval the CA’ s finding of the circumstantial evidence that led to the identity of the petitioner as such intruder: Chito was in the Building when the attack on MALOU took place. In not finding that proof of motive is miserably wanting in his case. Recto in People vs. by pressing on Malou’ s face the piece of cloth soaked in chemical while holding her body tightly under the weight of his own. petitioner went to the CA whereat his appellate recourse was docketed as CA-G. The provision reads: Sec. however. adds that if petitioner’ s intention was otherwise. hence. Positive identification pertains essentially to proof of identity and not per se to that of being an eyewitness to the very act of commission of the crime. to prove.1. This constitutes direct evidence. It is argued that petitioner’ s actuation thus described is an overt act contemplated under the law. If direct evidence is insisted under all circumstances. A different witness. 1999. a volatile poison which causes first degree burn exactly like what MALOU sustained on that part of her face where the chemical-soaked cloth had been pressed. Otherwise stated. for instance. From CHITO’ s bag which was found inside Room 310 at the very spot where witness Renato Alagadan saw CHITO leave it. for there can not be any other logical conclusion other than that the petitioner intended to ravish Malou after he attempted to put her to an induced sleep. but not necessarily because there is no direct evidence pointing to him as the intruder holding a chemical-soaked cloth who pinned Malou down on the bed in the early morning of December 13. This is the second type of positive identification. 1991.13 In the absence of direct evidence. in its assailed Decision dated January 13. leads to only fair and reasonable conclusion. finding no basis in fact and in law to deviate from the findings of the court a quo. in relation to the aforementioned article of the same code. In the present case. In not finding that it is improbable for petitioner to have committed the attempted rape imputed to him. the Court is disposed to rule for petitioner’ s acquittal. inconclusive andcontradictory. absent sufficient. which. be instances where. Aggrieved. Under Article 6. also stained with blue. 6. he should be acquitted on the ground that the offense charged against him has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt. a black "Adidas" satin short pants. then what obtains is an attempt to . In convicting petitioner of attempted rape on the basis merely of circumstantial evidence since the prosecution failed to satisfy all the requisites for conviction based thereon.

it is very unlikely that a rapist would be in his naked glory before even starting his attack on her. and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. Wrote the CA:The shedding of the clothes. with deliberate intent and decided purpose to kill. both of the attacker and his victim. CEB CR-HC No.e. distress or disturbance to the mind of the person to whom it is directed. it would be too strained to construe petitioner's act of pressing a chemical-soaked cloth in the mouth of Malou which would induce her to sleep as an overt act that will logically and necessarily ripen into rape. WHEREFORE. he would not have lain on top of the complainant. in Criminal Case No. Verily. The next question that thus comes to the fore is whether or not the act of the petitioner. As aptly observed by then Justice Ramon C. while the series of acts committed by the petitioner do not determine attempted rape. mere speculations and probabilities cannot substitute for proof required to establish the guilt of an accused beyond reasonable doubt.commit an indeterminate offense. however. For what reason petitioner wanted the complainant unconscious. xxx.26 That Malou. there is no need to allege malice. The CA-Cebu affirmed with modification the Joint Decision2 dated 10 March 2008 of the Regional Trial Court of Barotac Viejo. And during the trial. although not productive of some physical or material harm. torment. the Court is not saying that petitioner is innocent. Lest it be misunderstood. which if carried out to its complete termination following its natural course. petitioner did not commence at all the performance of any act indicative of an intent or attempt to rape Malou. which is not a juridical fact from the standpoint of the Penal Code. indicating the intention to commit a particular crime. is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE and a new one entered ACQUITTING petitioner Renato D. Likewise in People vs. constitutes an overt act of rape. Court of Appeals. 2000 in the . for there to be an attempted rape.18 There is absolutely no dispute about the absence of sexual intercourse or carnal knowledge in the present case. her unconsciousness. Philippines. a practice disfavored under the rule on evidence in criminal cases. if that was really his immediate intention.00. or as in this case. appellant was merely holding complainant’ s feet when his Tito Onio arrived at the alleged locus criminis. The information filed against petitioner contained an allegation that he forcefully covered the face of Malou with a piece of cloth soaked in chemical. embracing and kissing her. restraint or compulsion in aninformation for unjust vexation. Thus. Plodding on. the appellate court indulges in plain speculation.19Harmonizing the above definition to the facts of this case. Iloilo. is not completed. Baleros. Thus. the appellate court even anticipated the next step that the petitioner would have taken if the victim had been rendered unconscious.23 the Court held: xxx. xxx xxx xxx Petitioner’ s act of lying on top of the complainant. do not constitute attempted rape absent any showing that petitioner actually commenced to force his penis into the complainant’ s sexual organ. they constitute unjust vexation punishable as light coercion under the second paragraph of Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code. His sexual organ is not yet exposed because his intended victim is still struggling. with the accessory penalties thereof and to pay the costs.netOvert or external act has been defined as some physical activity or deed. The CA maintained that if the petitioner had no intention to rape. In the context of the constitutional provision assuring an accused of a crime the right to be informed of the nature and cause of theaccusation. will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. 2000 in the Municipality of Ajuy. Jr. by means of treachery and with evident premeditation. The Facts In Criminal Case No. is adjudged GUILTY of light coercion and is accordingly sentenced to 30 days of arresto menor and to pay a fine of P200. He has to make her lose her guard first.R.24 it cannot be said that petitioner was kept in the dark of the inculpatory acts for which he was proceeded against. Appellant. Malou testified about the pressing against her face of the chemical-soaked cloth and having struggled after petitioner held her tightly and pinned her down. 2001-1555.. the above-named accused. will have to come later. Branch 66 (RTC).00 or both. more than a mere planning or preparation. cried while relating to her classmates what she perceived to be a sexual attack and the fact that she filed a case for attempted rape proved beyond cavil that she was disturbed. of the charge for attempted rape. it would be stretching to the extreme our credulity if we were to conclude that mere holding of the feet is attempted rape. hitting her and inflicting gunshot wounds on the different parts of her breast which caused her death thereafter. J. would unjustly annoy or irritate an innocent person. vs.00 to P200. REGIE LABIAGA. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. Pancho. appellant. It cannot be overemphasized that petitioner was fully clothed and that there was no attempt on his part to undress Malou. 2002-1777 convicting appellant of frustrated murder. the assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals affirming that of the Regional Trial Court of Manila. 2001-155) convicting Regie Labiaga alias "Banok" (appellant) of murder and Criminal Case No. without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the voluntary desistance of the perpetrator.21In Perez vs. was charged with Murder with the Use of Unlicensed Firearm under an Information3which reads: That on or about December 23. 2002-1777. irritation.:The Case Before the Court is an appeal assailing the Decision1 dated 18 October 2011 of the Court of Appeals-Cebu (CA-Cebu) in CA-G. SO ORDERED. of any wrongdoing whatsoever. if not distressed by the acts of petitioner. however. while admittedly obscene and detestable acts. under an Information4 which states: That on or about December 23. the information against petitioner contains sufficient details to enable him to make his defense. unjust vexation exists even without the element of restraint or compulsion for the reason that this term is broad enough to include any human conduct which. unlawfully and feloniously attack. CONTRARY TO LAW.22 the Court acquitted therein petitioner of the crime of attempted rape. As it were. pointing out that: xxx. 01000. The penalty for coercion falling under the second paragraph of Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code is arresto menor or a fine ranging from P5. together with a certain Alias Balatong Barcenas and Cristy Demapanag (Demapanag). the pressing of a chemicalsoaked cloth while on top of Malou.1avvphil. did then and there willfully. D E C I S I O N CARPIO. assault and shoot JUDY CONDE alias ‘JOJO’with said unlicensed firearm. For. as earlier discussed. Province of Iloilo. As it were. conspiring. penetration is an essential act of execution to produce the felony.20At bottom then. after the incident in question. the accused must have commenced the act of penetrating his sexual organ to the vagina of the victim but for some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. under the premises. Aquino. To be sure. i. Petitioner. is anybody’ s guess. let alone touch her private part. the penetration. mashing her breasts. Where the intended victim is an educated woman already mature in age. inserting his hand inside her panty and touching her sexual organ. In the crime of rape. slight. armed withunlicensed firearm.25 The paramount question is whether the offender’ s act causes annoyance. The same individuals were charged with Frustrated Murder with the Use of Unlicensed Firearm in Criminal Case No. confederating and helping one another. Appellee.

Glenelyn was in their store. however. were in their home at Barangay Malayu-an. presented appellant. In Crim. Iloilo. as maximum. upheld the conviction for murder and frustrated murder. on the other hand. Pototan. Branch 66. that is by the timely and able medical assistance rendered to said Gregorio Conde which prevented his death. to pay Gregorio Conde P25. he was in D&D Ricemill. For death indemnity. When Judy and Glenelyn rushed to Gregorio’s aid. together with the necessary penalty provided by law and without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency and to pay the costs. SO ORDERED. Dr. thereby performing all the acts of execution which would produce the crime of Murder as a consequence. the shotgun fired. For lack of sufficient evidence. Nonetheless. but the shotgun jammed. The defense. Thereafter. This was corroborated by Frederick. Case No. 2001-1555 and hereby sentences the said accused to reclusion perpetua together with accessory penalty provided by law. and during the struggle.10Hence. without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency and to pay the costs. examined Gregorio after the incident. Shortly thereafter. shot the latter. "she is already dead. middle third right forearm 1 cm. Appellant. The two other accused were standing behind the appellant. this appeal. the physicians at the SaraDistrict Hospital where the victims were admitted. without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency and to pay the costs. the above-named accused." and the three fled the crime scene. The Provincial Warden. In Crim. accused Cristy Demapanag is acquitted of the crimes charged in both cases. Alias Balatong Barcenas remained at large.000. accused Cristy Demapanag is acquitted of the crime(s) charged in both cases."8 The CA-Cebu. The CA-Cebu also modified the Joint Decision by imposing the payment of moral and exemplary damages in both criminal cases.000. Jeremiah Obañana conducted the autopsy of Judy. Case No. Edwin Jose Figura. Iloilo Rehabilitation Center. Case No. 2001-1555 and hereby sentences the said accused to reclusion perpetua together with the accessory penalty provided by law. Iloilo is hereby directed to release accused Cristy Demapanag from custody unless he is being held for some other valid or lawful cause. Iloilo Rehabilitation Center. appellant.Municipality of Ajuy. It did not award moral damages. Gregorio called Judy for help. hitting him on the posterior aspect.00 is fixed "pursuant to the current judicial policy on the matter. to pay the heirs of Judy Conde P50. in light of the foregoing. CONTRARY TO LAW. by means of treachery and with evident premeditation. the court finds accused Regie Labiaga @ "Banok" GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Frustrated Murder and hereby sentences the said accused to a prison term ranging from six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum to ten (10) years and one (1) day of reclusion temporal as maximum.00 ascivil indemnity. without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency and to pay the costs Accused(’s) entire period of detention shall be deducted from the penalty herein imposed when the accused serves his sentence. His report stated that her death was caused by "cardiopulmonary arrest secondary to Cardiac Tamponade due to gunshot wound. The CA-Cebu pointed out that:The trial court granted the amount of P50. but nevertheless did not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the accused. which was part of their house. armed withunlicensed firearm.000. He claimed. Judy and Glenelyn Conde. Philippines.00 as exemplary damages.000. The Joint Decision dated March 10.6Version of the defense Appellant admitted that he was present during the shooting incident on 23 December 2000.00 as civil indemnity in Criminal Case No. Demapanag claimed that at the time of the shooting. appellant shot Judy in the abdomen. confederating and helping one another. He found that Gregorio sustained a gunshot wound measuring one centimeter in diameter in his right forearm and "abrasion wounds hematoma formation" in his right shoulder. Pototan. The Ruling of the RTC In its Joint Decision. the mental anguish of the surviving family should be assuaged by the award of appropriate and reasonable moral damages. and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. Likewise.00 as exemplary damages. The dispositive portion of the said Joint Decision should now read as follows: WHEREFORE. 2008 of the Regional Trial Court. conspiring. In diameter. Demapanag’s brother. together with the accessory penalty provided by law. Iloilo is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS. 2002- 1777. his daughter. unlawfully and feloniously attack. Version of the prosecution The prosecution’s version of the facts is as follows: At around 7:00 p. Gregorio. Demapanag. claiming that "the RTC gravely erred in convicting the appellant of the crime charged despite failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. He attempted to shoot appellant.00 as civilindemnity. Both appellant and Demapanag pled not guilty in both cases and joint trial ensued thereafter. and the latter’s brother. Glenelyn Conde. that he acted in self-defense. SO ORDERED. did then and there willfully. Jeremiah Obañana and Dr.SO ORDERED. however. the court hereby finds the accused Regie Labiaga @ "Banok" GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the Crime of Murder in Crim. Jose Edwin Figura.7The Ruling of the CA-CebuAppellant impugned the RTC’s Joint Decision. 2002-1777. who was approximately five meters away from Gregorio. premises considered. Frederick. the victim in Criminal Case No. The Ruling of the Court . The CA-Cebu made a distinction between the civil indemnity awarded by the RTC in Criminal Case No. 2001-1555 and the moral damages.000. Accused’s entire period of detention shall be deducted from the penalty herein imposed when the accused serves his sentence. Appellant tried to wrest the shotgun from Gregorio. Gregoriostepped outside. was convicted of murder and frustrated murder. armed with a shotgun. with deliberate intent and decided purpose to kill. Judy was pronounced dead on arrival while Gregorio made afull recovery after treatment of his gunshot wound. Appellant said. Ajuy. Gregorio Conde. The Provincial Warden. the amount of P50. the court hereby finds the accused Regie Labiaga @ "Banok" GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder in Crim. For lack of sufficient evidence. He claimed that he did not know if anyone was hit by that gunshot. which is approximately 14 kilometers away from the crime scene.00 as moral damages andP25. however. to fourteen (14) years and eight (8) months of reclusion temporal. as minimum. on the other hand. Case No. in Barotac Viejo. 2002-1777 the court finds accused Regie Labiaga @ "Banok" GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Frustrated Murder and hereby sentences the said accused to suffer the indeterminate penalty of eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor."5Dr. Iloilo is hereby directed to release accused Cristy Demapanag from custody unless he is being held for some other valid or lawful cause.000. the trial court should have awarded both. 2001-1555. to pay the heirs of Judy CondeP50. the appeal is DENIED. The prosecution presented four witnesses: Gregorio Conde. considering that they are two different kinds of damages. in light of the foregoing.000. challenged him to a fight. Gregorio and Judy were rushed to the Sara District Hospital. P50.00 as moral damages and P25.000. and Dr. The dispositive portion of the Joint Decision reads: WHEREFORE. the RTC acquitted Demapanag due to insufficiency of evidence. and his two daughters. assault and shoot Gregorio Conde with said unlicensed firearm. Province of Iloilo. on 23 December 2000."9The dispositive portion of the Decision of the CA-Cebu reads: WHEREFORE.m. without need of any evidence or proof of damages.

For. and the minimum which shall be within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the Code for the offense.21 If the evidence fails to convince the court that the wound sustained would have caused the victim’s death without timely medical attention. do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its medium period. Attempted and Frustrated Murder Treachery was correctly appreciated by the RTC and CACebu. His bare and self-serving assertions cannot prevail over the positive identification of the two (2) principal witnesses of the prosecution. who examined Gregorio after the shooting incident: Prosecutor Con-El: Q: When you examined the person of Gregorio Conde. If it appears that the weapon was deliberately chosen to insure the execution of the crime.11 explained that: When the accused admits killing a person but pleads self-defense. indeed. can you tell the court what was the situation of the patient when you examined him? A: He has a gunshot wound.16Since the conclusions made by the RTC regarding the credibility of the witnesses were not tainted with arbitrariness or oversight or misapprehension of relevant facts. as correctly pointed out by the CA-Cebu. the corresponding penalty for attempted murder shall be two degrees lower than that prescribed for consummated murder under Article 248.— Consummated felonies as well as those which are frustrated and attempted.Our review of the records of Criminal Case No. 2001-1555. conduct. not serious? A: Yes. x x x x Court (to the witness) Q: The nature of these injuries. appellant’s version of the incident was uncorroborated. and the trial court has the opportunity to take advantage of these aids. the same must be sustained by this Court. gesture.) In a frustrated felony. In Criminal Case No. but the patient was actually ambulatory and not in distress. 2002-1777 convinces us that appellant is guilty of attempted murder and not frustrated murder. the accused should be convicted of attempted murder and not frustrated murder.13Appellant’s claim that he did not know whether Gregorio was hit when the shotgun accidentally fired is also implausible. in view of the attending circumstances.15 we stated that: It is well settled that the evaluation of the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies is a matter best undertaken by the trial court because of its unique opportunity to observe the witnesses first hand and to note their demeanor.000. on the other hand. and to render the victim defenseless.17 The existence of treachery is not solely determined by the type of weapon used. and not frustrated murder in Criminal Case No. This was admitted by Dr. Damitan. frustrated.18In the instant case. and it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which. that is. nevertheless.00 as civil indemnity23andP30.20 In frustrated murder. appellant should serve an indeterminate sentence ranging from two (2) years. this Court hereby awards P75. especially when affirmed by the appellate court. We uphold appellant’s conviction in Criminal Case No. Section 1 of the Indeterminate Sentence Law provides: x x x the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence the maximum term of which shall be that which. four (4) months and one (1) day of prision correccional in its medium period to eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor in its medium period. Consummated. then treachery may be properly appreciated against the accused. People. in People v.00 as moral damages and .14 In People v. Your Honor. He has also abrasion wounds hematoma formation at the anterior aspect right shoulder. Appellant is also liable to pay P40. could be properly imposed under the rules of the Revised Penal Code. especially in the face of conflicting testimonies.Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code defines the stages in the commission of felonies: Art. A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present. and attempted felonies. however. it does not appear that the wound sustained by Gregorio Conde was mortal. 2. the reason for the non-accomplishment of the crime is some cause independent of the will of the perpetrator. Justifying circumstance of self-defense Appellant’s feeble attempt to invoke self-defense in both cases was correctly rejected by the RTC and the CA-Cebu. and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. 6. Mangune. And. Also. There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts.000. The use of a 12-gauge shotgun against two unarmed victims is undoubtedly treacherous. Both the CA-Cebu and the RTC found that the testimonies of the Condes were credible and presented in a clear and convincing manner. the Condes were unarmed when they were shot by appellant.) In a frustrated felony. This Court. and attitude under grilling examination. and inflection of the voice are potent aids in ascertaining the witness’ credibility.00 as exemplary damages. we find that the Condes’ account of the incident is persuasive. when appellant was arrested the following morning. appellant’s theory of self-defense is belied by the fact that: x x x The appellant did not even bother to report to the police Gregorio’s alleged unlawful aggression and that it was Gregorio who owned the gun. as appellant claimed.24 The award of P50. the emphasis.12 Appellant’s failure to present any other eyewitness to corroborate his testimony and his unconvincing demonstration of thestruggle between him and Gregorio before the RTC lead us to reject his claim of self-defense. as well as the award of moral and exemplary damages in both cases. that appellant should be convicted of attempted murder. are punishable. we hold that appellant should be convicted of attempted murder and not frustrated murder. we deem it proper to increase the amount of damages imposed by the lower court in both cases. but modify the civil indemnity awarded in Criminal Case No. in an attempted felony. A treacherous attack is one in which the victim was not afforded any opportunity to defend himself or resist the attack. he did not also inform the police that what happened to Gregorio was merely accidental. Under Article 51 of the Revised Penal Code. However. the reason for the non-fulfillment of the crime is a cause or accident other than the offender’s own spontaneous desistance. 2001-1555. Edwin Figura. In Serrano v. as it denies the victims the chance to fend off the offender. These are important in determining the truthfulness of witnesses and in unearthing the truth. This Court has consistently put much weight on the trial court’s assessment of the credibility of witnesses. the offender merely commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts and does not perform all the acts of execution. 2001-1555 for murder. In contrast. there must be evidence showing that the wound would have been fatal were it not for timely medical intervention.22Since Gregorio’s gunshot wound was not mortal. the burden of evidence shifts to him to prove by clear and convincing evidence the elements of his defense.000.00 as moral damages in the foregoing case is sustained. Award of damages In light of recent jurisprudence. the offender has performed all the acts of execution which should produce the felony as a consequence. not serious. We note.1âwphi1Thus.19 we distinguished a frustrated felony from an attempted felony in this manner: 1. 2002-1777. whereas in an attempted felony.In the instant case.000.

P50. 2002-1777. medico-legal officer of the National Bureau of Investigation ("NBI") of Region 7.a. who took part in the investigation of the crime. 10 (Emphasis supplied.. to eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as maximum. the following day. He promptly repaired to the municipal hall of Dumanjug to report the crime. Leticia. four (4) months and one (1) day of prision correccional as minimum. ill motive on the part of an "uncle" of the complainant. Hymen. afraid that the culprit would still come after her.00 as moral damages. they had a drinking spree and went to bed at 12:00 midnight waking up at 6:30 a.k. SPO2 Liberato Mascarinas. Catalina's brother-in-law.00 as civil indemnity. After partaking of supper at around 11:30 p. in diameter with moderate resistance.P30. in diameter. Vaginal walls. both coaptated. concocted the rape charge to get even with him because of an incident in August 1993 at a fiesta dance in upper Tangil." 6 When Quiñanola had satisfied his lust. not knowing what to do... asserted that. when the police officers returned at daytime. the accused. testified to attest to her husband's "good moral character" and to corroborate his testimony. Panla-an. and pay P40.m. Catalina could feel the sex organ of Escuadro "on the lips of (her) vulva" 7 while he made a push and pull movement. Refe. Catalina initially kept mum about it.000. Catalina finally said that she was raped but she would not reveal the names of the persons who had committed the dastardly act because of their threat. Zozobrado joined the fray and tried to hit Quiñanola but because Zozobrado was drunk.00 as exemplary damages. Vestibular mucosa. until she finally started to run home fearing that she might be followed. who had just arrived in Naga from Cebu City.a. 01000 with MODIFICATIONS. who stood by.8 prepared by Dr. he went to the residence of the victim and when he asked Catalina if she was able to recognize the malefactors. when George Camaso. Gilly and George Zozobrado went to the police station and named "Pitoy Quiñanola. Jr. she was able to respond to questions and to disclose that "Petoy. went fishing in Tangil Dumanjug Cebu until about ten o'clock that evening.8 cms. At about 8:30 a. appellant shall payP75. Hymenal orifice. Failing to find her pair of pants and panty. 12 He admitted that he had no misunderstanding of any kind with the complainant and her parents themselves." 9 The genital examination yielded the following findings on the victim: Pubic hairs.00 as exemplary damages. a member of the Philippine National Police stationed at Naga." 11Against the evidence submitted by the prosecution. Leticia said that after the workers had left their house at around midnight she and appellant talked for a while and then made love. Catalina went upstairs and. we AFFIRM the 18 October 2011 Decision of the Court of Appeals-Cebu in CAG. in the early morning of 06 March 1994.m. Catalina's sister. 2002-1777. He parried the blow and slapped Camaso on the face. Nicasio Arnaiz a farmer and store cutter added that work in the Quiñanola's house had started late in the morning of 05 March 1994 since they still waited for Quiñanola and his wife Patsy to arrive. kept on smoking a cigarette. Cebu.000. tense. Jr.1âwphi1. He denied having been in the company of his coaccused." 13Accompanied by the two tanods. he and his wife. Margarito Villaluna and Batiquil or Escuadro" as being the suspects in the rape incident. were the persons who ravished her. the team met Catalina Carciller and party who were themselves about to repair to the police headquarters. Baffled by Catalina's strange behavior. Escuadro took his turn by placing himself on top of Catalina. and Margarito Villaluna. Escuadro a. Jr. moderately thick. that Catalina had been raped." the other accused Eduardo Escuadro.00 as moral damages and P30. Quiñanola. She felt his organ "on the lips of (her) genitalia. After Vidal and Nicasio had gone home. tight and rogusities. later. who conducted the physical examination of Catalina on 07 March 1994.WHEREFORE. "Botiquil. PO2 William Beltran and SPO2 Liberato Mascarinas. The officers later invited her to the police station to identify a suspect whom she positively identified to be "Botiquil" or Eduardo Escuadro. While on their way to the latter's respective residences. we find that appellant Regie Labiaga is GUILTY of Attempted Murder and shall suffer an indeterminate sentence ranging from two (2) years. Escuadro and Quiñanola scampered immediately after Catalina's ordeal. SO ORDERED. Vidal Lañojan the carpenter was presented to state that Quiñanola was at home helping the carpenters until past 11 o'clock on the night of the incident. Tomas P. The defense also presented the two police officers. and insufficient identification. 2001-1555. was "so small as to preclude complete penetration of an average-size adult penis in erection without producing laceration. intact. According to him. Catalina was left wearing her T-shirt and brassieres. she kept silent and continued crying. 94-MI-7.) The report concluded that the hymenal orifice. and P30. Central Visayas. In Criminal Case No. Catalina just then sat down. He denied having been in the company of Quiñanola and insisted that the rapecharge had been the result of a mere mistaken identity. fully grown. Accused Eduardo Escuadro a. Labiae mejora and minora.8 cms. interposed alibi. and "Botiquil. Jr. Leticia Quiñanola the wife of accused Agapito Quiñanola. testified that it was his dayoff on 05 March 1994. Dumanjug. pinkish.. prominent.000. about 1.00 as exemplary damages.000.k. to push andpull" 5 even as Catalina still tried desperately to free herself from him. her mother and her elder sister took turns interrogating her. in relation to Criminal Case No. According to PO2 Beltran. barangay tanods Gilly and George Zozobrado reported the rape incident to him at midnight of 05 March 1994. Upon reaching home. In Criminal Case No. The work was finished at around 11:00 o'clock in the evening. Quiñanola went to bed with his wife around midnight until the following morning of 06 March 1994." referring to Agapito Quiñanola. Work in the house.. Accused Agapito Quiñanola. in their defense. showed that there was "no evidence of extragenital physical injury noted on the body of the Subject.000. She named "Pitoy Quiñanola" but said she did not know the . Fourchette.R. he said had stopped at about 11 o'clock that night. "Botiquil" declared that at about seven o'clock in the evening of 05 March 1994he and Pablito Cuizon. corroborated Escuadro's story abouttheir being together up until they parted company after a drinking spree.m. proceeded to the house of his parents in Panla-an. Still in a state of shock. the husband of his sister Jinga. got into trouble with Samuel Escuadro. wide. Mascarinas asked Catalina about the identities of the rapists. a suspect at the early stages of the policeinvestigation who was in the frequent company of the accused. hestumbled when Quiñanola had pushed him. moderately dense." at any time during the whole day and night of 05 March 1994. hid herself behind the door. Policemen were immediately dispatched to the Carcillers' residence. Guillermo Zozobrado. unzipped his pants and laid on top of her while Escuadro held her legs Quiñanola "started to pump. Living Case Report No. admits a tube 1. Pablito Cuizon. CEB CR-HC No.. annular. He entered the report inthe "temporary blotter because the suspect was unknown then.nêtGuillermo Zozobrado learned from his wife. to attend to the construction of their unfinished house. Quiñanola tried to pacify George Camaso who was then drunk but Camaso suddenly hit him. Quiñanola helped Vidal Lañojan and Nicasio Arnaiz in cementing the kitchen floor of theirhouse.000.

the two accused herein. The arrival of the policemen prompted her to verify from the Coast Guard whether herbrother had indeed left for Negros Oriental. then again. spontaneity and naturalness."23The Court finds this so-called incongruity committed by the complainant to a feeble attempt to discredit . plus all the accessory penalties prescribed by law. III. It explained: Now. this Court must again say that it has been continually guided by the principles (a) that an accusation of rape can be made with facility. misunderstood or misapplied facts or circumstances of weight and substance" that could have consequential effects. from 05 March 1994 until 09 March 1994 until harvesting corn. and (c) that the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence of the defense. Margarito Villaluna declared that he had been in Panla-an. as against the assessment made by the trial court which has described the victim's testimony to be impressed with "candor. Following the trial and submission of the case for decision. though innocent. 15The trial court ruled that the accused were liable for the crime of frustrated rape "with an eye to extending to the two accused the benefit of the principle that in case of doubt criminal justice naturally leans in favor of the milder form of penalty" 16 but that. as a matter of inexorable duty. at bottom. the proper penalty to be imposed upon the two principals. attended by the aforementioned six aggravating circumstances. which amended Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. Still unsatisfied with the result of her queries. not offset by any mitigating circumstance. and considering the attendance in the commission of the crime of the six (6) aggravating circumstances aforementioned. shall range from twenty years and one day to forty years. to disprove. because of the existence of "at least six (6) aggravating circumstances. Shortly after the group had left. policemen in the company of barangay tanods including Gilly Zozobrado and his son Marcelo. which the Court in other times and conditions might have been compelled. of the frustrated rape. They should be interdicted for that length of time from the usual and normal liasons (sic) and dealings with their fellowmen and their community so as to protect the latter from their pernicious and insidious examples. II. contrary to her declaration of having been made to lie on the ground because her T-shirt. which is also the indivisible afflictive penalty of reclusion perpetuawhich." 18the accused should each be meted the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Mercy Villaluna testified that. 20In reviewing rape cases. to mete out against them. Mercy went to Guinholngan where she met Margarito. not offset by even one mitigating circumstance. in the company of one Erwin Quirante also came looking for her brother. But because the crime committed here is "merely" frustrated rape for the reasons heretofore discussed. in view of the extreme moral turpitude and perversity which they exhibited in the commission of the crime — not until they shall have served at least thirty (30) years of the full range of forty (40) years of reclusion perpetuameted out against them in this case. and to pay the offended party civil indemnity in the amount of P50.00 each." appellants theorize that the sexual intercourse. THE COURT ERRED IN DISREGARDING THE INCONSISTENCIES OF THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES WHICH IF THOROUGHLY CONSIDERED COULD HAVE ALTERED THE DECISION IN FAVOR OF THE ACCUSED. THE COURT ERRED IN REFUSING TO CONSIDER THE REBUTTAL EVIDENCE OF DEFENSE WITNESSES EVEN IF THE SAME WERE NOT CONTROVERTED. V. it is difficult to prove. the two convicted accused interposed the following assignment of errors: I. courts would scrupulously examine the testimony of the complainant with the thought always in mind that the conviction of the accused would have to depend heavily on the credibility of the offended woman. is that the findings of the trial court on credibility are entitled to highest respect and will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of any clear showing that the trial court has "overlooked.22In assailing Catalina's credibility. another policeman. The stringency with which appellate tribunals have observed this rule is predicated on the undisputed vantage of the trial court in the evaluation and appreciation of testimonial evidence. is "not tainted with mud at all especially the back if she were made to lie down. ought to be punished with the mandatory penalty of death under the pertinent provisions of Section 11 and 23 of Republic Act No. The doctrine. in obedience to the implacable and peremptory demands and dictates of retributive justice. 7659. VI. It is not much different in this instance for. Botiquil was later brought to the police station Pitoy Quiñanola by that time had already gone to Naga. thus: WHEREFORE. if indeed true. IV. (b) that in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime which usually involves only two persons. His sister. the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution. 14 on 01 March 1996. short of imposing upon them the supreme penalty of death. THE COURT ERRED IN BELIEVING THE TESTIMONY OF COMPLAINING WITNESS CARCILLER EVEN IF THE SAME WERE CLOUDED WITH GRAVE INCONSISTENCIES. This is the most generous and charitable recommendation that the Court can make for these two malefactors. particularly that of the complainant. the crime of rape had it been consummated and had it been committed with the attendance of the above-mentioned aggravating circumstances. THE COURT ERRED BY DISREGARDING THE TESTIMONIES OF ACCUSED AND BY DISMISSING IT AS WEAK ALIBIS. SO ORDERED. in the morning of 06 March 1994. came to their house looking for her brotherMargarito. but more difficult for the person accused. and further amplified the aggravating circumstances enumerated in Article 14 of the same code.21 Expectedly. premises considered. The Court also hereby recommends that under no circumstance should the two accused be granted parole or conditional or absolute pardon. THE COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED GUILTY OF FRUSTRATED RAPE AND SENTENCING THEM TO 40 YEARS of RECLUSION PERPETUA. with absolutely no offsetting mitigating circumstances. Costs shall also be taxed against the two accused. should be one degree lower than the indivisible afflictive penalty of death. as principals by direct participation and indispensable cooperation of the frustrated rape of the complaining witness Catalina "Cathy" Carciller. found the two accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of "frustrated rape" and sentenced them accordingly. Negros Oriental. THE COURT ERRED IN FAILING TO GIVE WEIGHT TO THE TESTIMONIES OF THE POLICEMEN WHICH WERE UNCONTROVERTED AND WITH PRESUMPTIONOF REGULARITY IN THE PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES. could have only been committed against Catalina in a sitting position.names of "the other persons" although she could recognize them by face. both co-conspirators. alias "Batiquil".000. 19In their appeal to this court. 17 not offset by any mitigating circumstance. hereby sentences these two accused individually toReclusion Perpetua of Forty (40) Years. under Section 21 of the amendatory statute. appellants assail the credibility of the prosecution witnesses. She was told that her brother was in the boat that departed for Negros in early dawn of 02 March 1994. the Court hereby finds guilty beyond reasonable doubt the two accused Agapito "Petoy" Quiñanola and Eduardo Escuadro. the court a quo. in seeking a reversal of the judgment of conviction. by direct participation and indispensable cooperation. marked Exhibit E.

after Agapito Quiñanola ordered Eduardo Escuadro to remove your pants and panty what did Eduardo Escuadro do. where were you forced to sit down. Catalina explained that while she gave appellant Escuadro's nickname "Botiquil" to the investigating police officer. the testimony deserves faith and credit.26 Not much differently could be said of Catalina's identification of appellants as being her ravishers.31 So. NAZARENO Q Now. did you see his penis? A Yes. As regards the allegation of appellants that the testimony of Catalina contradicted in certain respects that of prosecution witness Rufo Ginto. Catalina creditably explained that when it was offered in evidence. Q You also said that Eduardo Escuadro took his turn and laid on top of you and made a push and pull on you. did you feel that the penis of Escuadro inserted into your vagina? A I felt it on the lips of my vulva. TRIAL PROS. she had already dusted and rid it of grass particles. Q What do you mean by took his turn. Q What did you do when you heard those words coming from Agapito Quiñanola? A I cried. It is unbelievable that a young barrio lass would concoct a tale of defloration publicly admit having been ravished and her honor tainted allow the examination of her private parts.34 Moreover. Thus: Q Did you say any testimony in the direct that you were on the ground at the time when you were raped by these two accused? A They pointed a gun at me and ordered me to lie down. is enough to sustain a conviction. COURT Q Why what were you wearing at that time? A Pants. the latter did not mention that name in the affidavit because. what did he say? A He said that if I will not accede to what he wanted me to do and if I will shout. if any? A He ordered Eduardo Escuadro to remove my pants and panty. Q Now. also. Q When he pointed a gun at you. COURT: Q How did you resist? A I said I will not sit down. Q After that what happened when Agapito Quiñanola was already on top of you and kept on making a push and pull? A Eduardo Escuadro took his turn. NAZARENO: Q What did Agapito Quiñanola do.her testimony. She knew that appellant Quiñanola was a policeman and a "popular maldito" (nasty) in the locality. what (sic) were you doing at that time? A I cried and tried to free myself. do you mean to say that he inserted his penis into your vagina? A I felt something hard on the lips of my genitals. Q Did you see the penis Eduardo Escuadro? A No. Q In effect did you sit down as ordered by him? A I resisted. The reliance being made by appellants on the affidavit of Catalina in order to discredit her is likewise futile. The Court is convinced of the sexual assault made against her. NAZARENO: Q When Agapito Quiñanola lay on top of you and made a push and pull movement. The Court has consistently ruled that discrepancies between the statement of an affiant in an affidavit and those made on the witness stand do not necessary downgrade testimonial evidence. according to the officer. he will kill me.28 Catalina knew that appellant Escuadro. TRIAL PROS. Q When Agapito Quiñanola unzipped his pants. what did Eduardo Escuadro do? A He was holding on to my legs. Q Then what happened after that? A Agapito Quiñanola started to pump. especially when it comes from the mouth of a credible witness. Q After that what happened? In effect. established rather convincingly by the prosecution. when Agapito Quiñanola already unzipped his pants. to push and pull. suffice it to say that the testimony of Rufo Ginto (who was noted by the trial court not to be "an intelligent witness"29) was merely corroborative in nature and neither dealt with the actual commission of the crime nor delved on material points. for the wicked acts committed against her. Here follows the testimony of Catalina on this score. Q You said that you were forced by Agapito Quiñanola to sit down. TRIAL PROS. Q Now. Ex parte affidavits are usually incomplete and frequently prepared by an administrating officer and cast in the latter's language and understanding of what the affiant has said. she was categorical that she had known appellants even before the rape incident. In her testimony. please specify what did Escuadro do? He did what Agapito had just done to you? COURT: Q What did Agapito Quiñanola do to you actually? A He lay on top of me and did a push and pull movement. At all events. he was doing the push and pull movement. the affiant would simply sign the affidavit after it has been read to him or to her. 25And on why her T-shirt was no longer soiled with mud when presented in court. She could not have been mistaken in the identification of the culprits since appellants themselves held a flashlight which they used that added to the illumination shed by a fluorescent lamp and two bulbs on the side of a house only some meters away. Q You were forced to sit down on the ground? A Yes.24The fact that she must have been lying down when violated has even more been made clear by the defense on cross-examination.Q Lie on the ground? A Yes. when you resisted? A He pointed his gun to me. Q What is this something hard that you felt that touched the lips of your vagina or vulva? A His organ or penis. specifically what did Eduardo Escuadro do? A The same as Agapito did.32The positive identification of appellants as being the perpetrators of the crime effectively effaces their alibi. if any? A He did what Agapito Quiñanola commanded him. On the witness stand. Q What kind of pants? A Denim. when Eduardo Escuadro removed your pants and panty where was Agapito Quiñanola and what did Agapito Quiñanola do? A He unzipped his pants. TRIAL PROS. alibi might be aptly considered only when an accused has been shown to be in some other place at the crucial time and that it would have been physically impossible for him to be at the locus criminis or its immediate vicinity at the time of the commission of the . you said Agapito Quiñanola opened his fly or unzipped his pants. if any. whetherappellants spent their lust on Catalina in a sitting position or lying down would not be of any real moment forwhat remained clear. the Court has repeatedly said that the lone testimony of the victim in a rape case. referring to Agapito Quiñanola. Q When Agapito Quiñanola approached you and laid on top of you. were your pants and panty removed by Eduardo Escuadro? A Yes. was that appellants had forced carnal knowledge of the victim. what did he do? A He approached me and lay on top of me. Q What did you feel when Eduardo Escuadro was already on top of you and made a push and pull on you? A I held my breath.30 There is no plausible reason why Catalina should testify against appellants. NAZARENO Q Now. Q What did you do when Agapito Quiñanola was already on top of you and made a push and pull on you? A I struggled to free myself. was commonly known as "Batiquil" (Botiquil). if credible. COURT: Q How about you.33 The rule is that affirmative testimony is far weightier than a mere denial. Catalina's candid and straightforward narration of the two sexuals assaults perpetrated on her on the night of the incident unmistakably deserves credence. imputing upon them so grave a crime as rape if it did not happen. a resident of Punla-an far from her own abode. Q When you cried what did Agapito Quiñanola do. the affidavit was merely a "shortcut". and undergo all the trouble and inconvenience not to mention the trauma and scandal of a public trial had she not in fact been raped and truly moved to protect and preserve her honor as well as to obtain justice. Quite frequently. This Court has consistently held that where there is no evidence to show any dubious reason or improper motive why a prosecution witness should testify falsely against the accused or implicate him in a serious offense. in what particular place or area? A Just behind the back of the school.

980.46Let it be said once again that."38In People vs. L31886. 434) because not all acts of execution was performed. jurisprudence is wellsettled to the effect that for rape to be consummated. The medical examination merely stated that the smallness of the vaginal orifice only precludes COMPLETE penetration.42 (Emphasis supplied. many cases of pregnancy have been reported in women with unruptured hymen. People vs. as once so said in a case. No. The fact that there was no deep penetration of the victim's vagina and that her hymen was intact does not negate rape. The accused may be convicted on the sole basis of complainant's testimony of credible and the findings of the medico-legal officer do not disprove the commission of rape. afterwards Eduardo Escuadro transferred to hold both my legs. "carnal knowledge" unlike its ordinary connotation of sexual intercourse. Thus. 1974. as the Revised Penal Code presently so stands. in the crime of rape. Rabadan.. We have set the uniform rule that for the consummation of rape." In the case at bench. 9 Phil. The rape is deemed consummated in either case. and it was sufficient to prove carnal knowledge of a child under twelve years of age. from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim. rupture of the hymen is not necessary. he actually attains his purpose and. since the hymen may not be torn despite repeated coitus. 49 Phil. was that Escuadro had kept holding both her legs when Quiñanola took her. there is no showing that his daughter's hymen was penetrated.R. April 29. Partial penile penetration is as serious as full penetration. Amores. et al. No.R. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ merely. Q Since you did not spread your legs and Quiñanola was on top of you. L-32996. because he has performed the last act necessary to produce the crime. Gabayton.) In its recent holding in People vs. 62 Phil. Royeras. As in the case at bar it can be said that there was penetration although incomplete.35In the context it is used in the Revised Penal Code. Research in medicine even points out that negative findings are of no significance. 48 Phil. Summer's testimony has established without a doubt that accused-appellants organ managed to come into contact with her vagina. kick the one holding it and pushed Quiñanola or do any harm to him? A No." The trial court appellants only frustrated rape. did you not attempt to hold his penis forcibly so that he will refrain from raping you? A I was not able to think of that because of my fear and besides that Eduardo Escuadro was holding on to both my legs.) In another case. the Court has observed: Accused appellant draws attention to the fact that based on the medico-legal findings. People vs. 58 SCRA 505). considering her struggle to free herself. by the accused's penis suffices to constitute the crime of rape as full entry into the victim's vagina is not required to sustain a conviction. Unites States vs. the Court has said: While the evidence may not show full penetration on both occasions of rape the slightest penetration is enough to consummate the offense in fact there was vulva penetration in both cases. Taking into account the .43 the Court has declared that "a mere knocking at the doors of the pudenda.crime. so to speak. by the "mere touching of the external genitalia by a penis capable of consummating the sexual act. There are half measures or even quarter measures nor is their gravity graduated by the inches of entry. Thus —Q At that time when he unzipped and your hands were free. Oscar. In fact. is sufficient to warrant conviction. August 21. bombardment of the drawbridge is invasion enough even if the troops do not succeed in entering the castle. G. 527. nor was there any evidence of injuries inflicted. perfect penetration is not essential. However. The offender merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts.47 the Court has explicitly pronounced: Clearly.36 The crime of rape is deemed consummated even when the man's penis merely enters the labia or lips of the female organ37 or. This does not mean that rape has not been committed.45This testimony would indicate that Catalina. ATTY. since this crime is committed even with the slightest penetration of a woman's sex organ. What is fundamental is that the entrance of at least the introduction. from that moment also all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished. People vs. nor is it necessary that the vagina sustained a laceration especially if the complainant is a young girl. Orita. People vs. of the male organ into the labia of the pudendum is proved. Q Did you spread your legs? A No. ruled that there was no "conclusive evidence of penetration of the genital organ of the offended party 44in the (a) Catalina had admitted that she did not spread her legs and (b) the medico-legal officer's findings showed she did not sustain any extragenital injuries and her hymenal orifice was so small that an erect average-size penis would not have completely penetrated it would causing laceration. Hernandez. because I was already frightened considering that there were two of them and they were armed. The fact that the hymen was intact upon examination does not belie rape for a broken hymen is not an essential element of rape not does the fact that the victim has remained a virgin negate the crime. COURT: Q Your two feet? A Yes. rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the female organ (People vs. What must be proven in the crime of rape is merely the introduction of the male organ into the labia of the pudendum and not the full penetration of the complainant's private part. 694. however.41 where the accused has been found guilty of raping his daughter then less than twelve years old. was making a push and pull on you Escuadro was holding on to your two feet? A Yes. Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient. Echegaray. In a manner of speaking. It would seem that the trial court failed to consider Catalina's testimony in its entirely she testified: Q And when he mounted on top of you Escuadro was holding on to your two feet and all the time that he Quiñanola. without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction. 559.40(Emphasis supplied. there is no such crime as frustrated rape. In a long line of cases (People vs. What she did distinctly recall.39 in convicting a father of having raped twice his 1l-year-old daughter. A medical examination is not an indispensable element in a prosecution for rape. does not necessarily require that the vagina be penetrated or that the vagina be penetrated or that the hymen be ruptured. CREEP: Q Now in other words since your two feet were held and Eduardo Escuadro was waving (sic [moving]) slightly to your left as you demonstrated your two feet became closer to each other. 56 SCRA 666. it could not be spread? A I was still struggling at that time to free myself and I do not know whether my legs were speared out or not. As we held in Baculi: "there could still be a finding of rape even if despite the repeated intercourse over a period of four years the complainant still retained an intact hymen without signs of injury. 1974. the felony is consummated. Presence of a laceration in the vagina is not an essential prerequisite to prove that a victim has been raped. understandably failed to notice whether her legs were spread apart or close together during her ordeal. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ. 53 Phil. did you not bother to pull your legs. without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina. People vs. G. Necessarily. In People vs. enough to cause her pain. Garcia. Q Now if Eduardo Escuadro was the one holding on both your two legs how was Quiñanola able to place himself on top of you? A It was because Eduardo Escuadro had already released my hands and Quiñanola was the one holding on to it already. Escober. Tayaba. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender.

Appellee. sentenced to the penalty of reclusion perpetua in each case. supra. 7659. in the City of Manila. As regards appellant Quiñanola. 7659 when rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two persons. Eriñia. in Criminal Case Nos. In Criminal Case No. militate to aggravate crime. by means of force and intimidation. appellants can. in its penultimate paragraph. it appears that this is a "stray" decision inasmuch as it has not been reiterated in Our subsequent decisions. Of course. the Court will see its continued usage in the statute book as being merely a persistent lapse in language. unlawfully and feloniously. 97159184. Costs against appellants. 97-159185.That on or about January 14. Philippines. Article 14 of the Revised Penal Code. a minor. We are aware of our earlier pronouncement in the case of People vs. Appellant. the said accused did then and there willfully.:This is an appeal from the decision1 of the Regional Trial Court of Manila. had this circumstance been properly alleged in the information. the Court does not subscribe to the view of the trial court that accused-appellants have employed means which added ignominy to the natural effects of the crime.000. 50 Phil. particularly in "stripp(ing) the victim of her denim parts and panties and then sending her home in this humiliating and distressing condition. However.That on or about April 15. such as reclusion perpetua to death would justify even without any mitigating circumstance. that a malefactor has sported a firearm does not. the said accused did then and there willfully. unlawfully and feloniously. Said appellants are ordered to pay jointly and severally Catalina Carciller the sum of P100. D E C I S I O N CORONA. CONTRARY TO LAW. We are of the opinion that this particular provision on frustrated rape is a dead provision. 50 includes among its enumeration of generic aggravating circumstances the fact that the crime is committed with the aid of armed men or persons who insure or afford impunity. by threatening Jessica Castro y de la Cruz of death should she resist or report the matter to anybody. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. The description by the trial court of appellants as being "powerfully. CONTRARY TO LAW. Philippines. be held accountable under that provision since the information has likewise averred that the "above-named accused. 97-159186 and 97-159187. by means of force and intimidation. 998 [1927] where. The absence of any aggravating circumstance in the commission of a crime punishable by two (2) indivisible penalties. the crime. The Eriñia case. amending Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. Castro. convicting appellant for two counts of simple rape.That on or about March 12. that is. against her will.56WHEREFORE. 1960) and Republic Act No. in the City of Manila.00 moral damages. it is hardly conceivable how the frustrated stage in rape can ever be committed. In Criminal Case No. We are aware of Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. had carnal knowledge of the latter against her will. Until Congress sees it fit to define the term frustrated rape and thereby penalize it. the aggravating circumstance of his being a member of the Philippine National Police would have exposed him to the penalty of death51under the amendatory provisions of Article 335 by Republic Act No. . might have prompted the law-making body to include the crime of frustrated rape in the amendments introduced by said laws. under 12 years of age. nonetheless. in the commission of the crime Finally. vs. Philippines.nature. The law should be deemed to have already considered this circumstance in qualifying the crime to its "heinous" character rendering in that context abuse of superior strength has an inherent element thereof. in the City of Manila. The factalone. as amended by Republic Act No.00. by threatening to kill said Jessica Castro. ARNULFO ORANDE y CHAVEZ. Likewise. and an indeterminate penalty of 8 years to 14 years and 8 months of imprisonment for the frustrated rape. brawny and meanlooking" as against the "short slender easily cowed" 15-yearold victim would not here warrant a finding that abuse of superior strength has aggravated the commission of the crime. by means of force and intimidation. one count of statutory rape and one count of frustrated rape.00 by way of indemnity ex delictu for the two counts of consummated rape plus P60. elements and manner of execution of the crime of rape and jurisprudence on the matter. has retained the provision penalizing with reclusion perpetua to death an accused who commits homicide by reason or on the occasion of an attempted or frustrated rape. Neither may nighttime be considered an aggravating circumstance in the absence of proof of its having been deliberately sought out by appellants to by appellants to facilitate the commission of the offense. fraud or disguise. 97-159186 . 7659. by itself.000.52 Craft fraud or disguise53 is a species of aggravating circumstance that denotes intellectual trickery or cunning resorted to by an accused to aid in the execution of his criminal design or to lure the victim into a trap and to conceal theidentity of the accused." referring to the two appellants. and sentencing him to suffer three counts of reclusion perpetua for the simple and statutory rapes. Complainant Jessica Castro charged appellant with raping her four times between January 1994 and November 1996. Each appellant is liable for two counts of consummated rape on account of a clear conspiracy between them shown by their obvious concerted efforts to perpetrate.000. unlawfully and feloniously. Even while the information has failed to allege the use of a deadly weapon in the commission of the rape.54 There is nothing on record that even remotely suggests that accused-appellants so deliberately sought to leave Catalina with bottoms bare that she might be left alone in shame with only her T-shirt and brassieres on. 1965) which provides. 1995. that is. that is. 1994. appellants Agapito Quiñanola y Escuadro and Eduardo Escuadro y Floro are each found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two (2) counts of consummated rape and accordingly. Prevailing jurisprudence55 likewise allows the victim is have an award of moral damages for having evidently undergone mental physical and psychological sufferings. the imposition of the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua. We found the offender guilty of frustrated rape there being no conclusive evidence of penetration of the genital organ of the offended party.49Under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act No. 97-159185. had carnal knowledge of said Jessica C. the crime is punishable by reclusion perpetuata to death.48The Court is not unaware that Republic Act No. have conspiratorially committed the crime. 4111 (dated March 29. 1996.1âwphi1. The trial court has ordered appellants to each pay the offended party and indemnity in the amount of P50.nêtSO ORDERED. for the penalty of death when the rape is attempted or frustrated and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof. Branch 18. had carnal knowledge of said Jessica C. 97-159184 . The informations filed against appellant by the City Prosecutor read: In Criminal Case No. built. J. by threatening JESSICA CASTRO Y DE LA CRUZ of death should she resist or report the matter to anybody. one after the other. Each of them therefore is responsible not only for the rape committed personally by him but also for the rape committed by the other as well. the said accused did then and there willfully. The fact that one of the appellants has pretended to be a member of the New People's Army does not necessarily imply the use of craft. then. The availability of appellants being on delict is solidary. 2632 (dated September 12.

to play outside. Jessica felt pain in her vagina and saw it smeared with blood and semen. Further. occurred on January 14. Girlie de la Cruz Castro. The adjacent room was occupied by Girlie’s brother and his family while the room on the second floor was occupied by Girlie’s sister and her family. Appellant brandished his balisong and threatened to kill her. To earn a living. inserted his finger into her vagina and kissed it. by threatening to kill said Jessica Castro. appellant was with her to buy fish in Navotas and sell them in Paco market. The third rape. His penis slightly penetrated her vagina. Incidentally. a teacher of Jessica. subject of Criminal Case No. in the City of Manila. In Criminal Case No. Jessica was then watching television while her brothers and sisters were sleeping beside her.3 Thereafter. made her story of rape unbelievable. Appellant was left in the house with Jessica. 1983. normal rugae6For his defense. When appellant and Jessica were alone. subject of Criminal Case No. 97-159187. Girlie was in the market while Jessica and her siblings were left in the house watching television. The first incident of rape. no scars. that is. They occupied a room on the ground floor which served as their bedroom. except Jessica. saying that she might get pregnant. Director of the Child Protection Unit. Jessica admitted that appellant had raped her several times. pulled her towards him and made her lie down on the floor. Bernadette J. 97-159185. Jessica did the same. kissed and fingered Jessica’s vagina. He then held her by the shoulder and made her lie down. Dr. Philippines. He mashed her breasts. as appellant opened the door. a pedicab driver. had carnal knowledge of the latter against her will. She arrived from school at around 11:00 a. He then covered himself and Jessica with a blanket.m. The trial court gave credence to the testimony of Jessica and convicted the appellant: WHEREFORE. When confronted by Mrs. Accused Arnulfo Orande y Chavez is convicted of simple rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua with all the accessory penalties provided by law. Mrs. during the purported first and second incidents of rape. However. appellant removed his clothes. got his knife and ordered her to undress. Girlie sold fish at the Paco Market. pulled out a balisong and ordered Jessica to undress. then mashed her breasts. Thereafter. Antonina de la Cruz. 1996. she had the motive to falsely accuse him of raping her. De la Cruz then accompanied Jessica to the police station to file a complaint and to the Philippine General Hospital (PGH). The evidence of the prosecution showed that appellant was the common law husband of Jessica’s mother Girlie. Attenuated from 1 o’clock position to 4 o’ clock position and from 6 o’ clock to 12 o’ clock position Notch at 5 o’clock Healed hymenal tear at the 6 o’ clock position Anus: Normal rectal tone. 97-159187. appellant pleaded not guilty. Mrs. occurred sometime in November 1996. Mojica. Appellant also put on his pants and told Jessica not to tell her mother what he did to her. 97-159184. She tried to leave the room but appellant locked the door and threatened to kill her if she told her mother what happened. Child Protection Unit. He assured her that she would not get pregnant because she was not yet menstruating. 1996. When Jessica’s brother and sister arrived. the trial was subsequently postponed for eight months as Jessica was suffering from psychological and emotional trauma from her horrifying ordeal. Mojica called up Jessica’s aunt. Jessica went to thebathroom to wash herself. during the alleged second rape incident. started living with Girlie and her three children sometime in 1993 in a two-storey house in Paco. He only stopped what he was doing when someone knocked at the door. noticed the unusual treatment of Jessica by appellant. Appellant and Jessica hurriedly put on their clothes and. a minor. Then he mounted her. he placed himself on top of her. Jessica was then only nine years and four months old. The last rape. 97-159184. knowing that her mother’s relatives were in the same house. His live-in partner Girlie testified that. appellant ordered Jessica’s brother and sister to visit their mother at the Paco Market and sent his children to play outside the house. the accused is also convicted of simple rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua with all the accessory penalties provided by law. Appellant reached his orgasm shortly after penetrating her slightly. trial on the merits ensued. occurred on March 14. appellant advanced denial and alibi. 97159186. no pigmentation. and the appellant for child abuse. placed himself on top of complainant and succeeded in partially penetrating her. and placed himself on top of her. removed his pants and her shorts. He ordered her to undress which she obeyed out of fear as appellant was armed with a knife. He denied ever raping Jessica and testified that. Appellant argued that since Jessica disapproved of his relationship with her mother. when Jessica was 11 years and 3 months old.2 Arraigned on September 5. Appellant. and narrated to her what Jessica had confessed. he removed his pants. he knelt down. he kissed and fingered her vagina. examined Jessica and the findings revealed the following: Genital Examination: Hymen: Estrogenized. her siblings and appellant’s two children with Girlie. In Criminal Case No. in Criminal Case No. CONTRARY TO LAW. Apparently still not satisfied. appellant hurriedly put on his clothes. 1997. She then went to the bathroom to wash herself and change her bloodstained underwear. happened sometime in April 1994 when Girlie was at the fish market. buying her stock from the Navotas fish market late at night and sometimes in the early hours of the morning. Then she put on her shorts. when Jessica was 12 years and 6 months old. Manila owned by Girlie’s mother. Madrid. Sometime in March 1997. Mrs. Appellant then told her they would do what they did before.m. 97-159185. CONTRARY TO LAW.5The second rape. Girlie was again in the public market while Jessica was at home with her siblings who were all asleep. he pointed out the improbability of the alleged first and fourth incidents of rape inasmuch as the make-up of the room made it impossible for Jessica’s siblings not to wake up during the commission of the crime. the said accused did then and there willfully. 1995 at around 11:00 a. Girlie gave birth to two more children by appellant. Soon after. he was driving his pedicab. to be examined. Appellant grabbed Jessica’s right hand and lasciviously jabbed her palm with his finger. by means of force and intimidation. against her will. subject of Criminal Case No. Appellant then removed his pants. partially penetrated her until he ejaculated. appellant arrived and sent the children.In Criminal . Jessica also filed a criminal case against her mother. having been born on December 19. Appellant further contended that Jessica’s failure to cry out for help. While holding the knife. While she was changing her clothes. prior to the filing of the aforementioned cases. subject of Criminal Case No.m. Trial resumed in November 1998 with the prosecution presenting Jessica as its first witness. at around 11:00 p. He stood up with semen still dripping from his penis. Jessica pushed him away and told him she wanted to sleep.4 The lower court ordered the suspension of the trial to enable her to undergo psychological therapy at the Child Protection Unit of the Philippine General Hospital. then mashed her breasts. Mrs.That on or about November 17. Since she was afraid. kitchen and living room. under 12 years of age. Adoracion Mojica. unlawfully and feloniously. Jessica was forced to remove her clothes.Castro. Left alone with Jessica. Appellant told Jessica that they would again do what they did before but she refused.

Jessica Castro.Case No.7In this appeal. 97-159186. To charge appellant with rape for the sole purpose of exacting revenge.000. the accused had orgasm and Jessica’s sex organ was smeared with his semen. We have consistently ruled that errorless recollection of a harrowing experience cannot be expected of a witness (a very young one at that) specially when she is recounting details of an occurrence so humiliating. 97-159187. 97-159185. On the other hand. desire for justice and the punishment of her defiler. it was the incidents of rape that caused her psychological and emotional imbalance which required therapy at the Child Protection Unit of the Philippine General Hospital. P200. or if her motive were other than a fervent desire to seek justice. even by the mildest threat to her life. The fact that Jessica had to undergo psychological treatment12 after her first testimony in February 1998 belies appellant’s defense. 97-159187 in the body of the . not to mention the fact that these details pertained to something she had very little knowledge of. Jessica was watching TV in a lying position beside her two sleeping siblings. II. In fact. the court a quo: xxx discerned from her demeanor the intense mental torture. embarrassment. we agree with the observation of the Solicitor General that the court a quo was referring to Criminal Case No. so alien as rape. 97-159185. and to pay the costs. ONE COUNT OF FRUSTRATED RAPE AND TWO COUNTS OF SIMPLE RAPE. THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF ONE COUNT OF STATUTORY RAPE. nominal and exemplary damages in the respective sums of P400. cannot be expected to have the courage or confidence to immediately report a sexual assault on her. in reporting the crime does not necessarily detract from the witness’ credibility as long as it is satisfactorily explained. being then only nine years and three months old when the first rape was committed. (emphasis supplied. 97-159187.19However.16 Jessica was threatened by appellant that he would kill her mother and relatives if she reported the rape.13Appellant makes much of the fact that two incidents of rape happened inside the room where the other children were sleeping. 97-151987.15 Besides. Decision) Such was the only rape incident where the trial court concluded there was no penetration. moral. the factual basis for the conviction in Criminal Case No. She was continually in tears while testifying and the proceeding was interrupted several times to calm her down.00.9 In the present case. However. we find no reason to deviate from the wellestablished rule that the credibility of witnesses is a matter best assessed by the trial court because of its unique opportunity to observe them firsthand and to note their demeanor. had a rift with her siblings who lived in the same house and forbade Jessica to socialize with them. It was likewise highly probable that the strained relations between Jessica’s mother. conduct and attitude.18The court a quo convicted appellant of one count of frustrated rape in Criminal Case No. was in Navotas buying fish. even of three years. this Court has likewise ruled that delay. there being no such crime as frustrated rape in this jurisdiction. so painful and. He succeeded in nudging her sex organ with the tip of his penis. p. while their mother. The appeal is partly meritorious. at around 11:00 p. and not Criminal Case No.000. the failure of Jessica to cry out for help during the incidents in question. Girlie.. the factual basis thereof in the body of the decision reads: With regard to Criminal Case No. The alleged inconsistencies and improbabilities in Jessica’s testimony did not discredit her nor reveal any fabrication. when the accused held Jessica’s right hand and jabbed her palm with his finger. appellant assigns the following errors: I.000.14Also. Inconsistencies regarding minor details were attributable to the fact that she was recalling details of incidents that happened three years before.10No young woman would allow an examination of her private part and subject herself to the humiliation and rigor of a public trial if the accusations were not true. Jessica and her two siblings together with the accused were in their house. In Criminal Case No. but was unable to accomplish penetration.8The Office of the Solicitor General argues that appellant’s convictions should be upheld as the prosecution was able to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. after which the accused removed his pants and with a balisong in his hand. in a house where there are other occupants or even in places which to many might appear unlikely and high-risk venues for its commission. THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT OF FRUSTRATED RAPE DESPITE THE FACT THAT UNDER PREVAILING JURISPRUDENCE THERE IS NO SUCH CRIME. 2. in this case. Then he told her to remove her short pants. A young girl like Jessica can easily be mesmerized by fear of bodily harm and. he is ordered to pay the victim. and to pay the costs. These weak defenses cannot stand against the positive identification and categorical testimony of a rape victim. This Court finds that the prosecution was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt appellant’s guilt for two counts of statutory rape and two counts of simple rape. as appellant implies in his brief. the Court has gathered that sometime in April. 97-159187. panty and Tshirt. This Court has repeatedly held that rape can be committed in the same room where other members of the family are also sleeping. the accused is convicted of frustrated rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of 8 years of prision mayor as minimum. Moreover. takes a certain kind of psychiatric depravity which this Court does not see in Jessica. due to the resistance offered by her by struggling and kicking him. in convicting appellant of frustrated rape: The trial court convicted appellant of simple rape in Criminal Case No. emotional pain and bitterness she suffered whenever she was asked to recall and narrate the humiliating sexual ordeals she had gone through. Girlie. In a number of cases.On the civil liability of the accused in the four cases. did not at all make her testimony improbable inasmuch as it is not uncommon for a young girl of tender age to be easily intimidated into silence and conceal for sometime the violation of her honor. the dispositive portion of which read: x x x xxx xxx In Criminal Case No. 97-159185.11We do not subscribe to appellant’s theory that the filing of the rape charges was motivated by Jessica’s dislike for him.00. Nonetheless. and her . xxx xxx x x x SO ORDERED. or to report to them what happened. appellant’s defenses of denial and alibi deserve no consideration. logical and credible. uncle and aunt prevented Jessica from confiding in them.00 and P100. inspite of the physical proximity of her relatives.m. the accused is convicted of frustrated rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of 8 years of prision mayor as minimum to 14 years and 8 months of reclusion temporal as maximum. 1994. specially when a death threat hangs over her head. After a thorough review of the records. unlike a mature woman. Jessica’s mother. the accused is likewise convicted of statutory rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua with all the accessory penalties provided by law. the trial court found Jessica’s testimony convincing.17In view of the credible testimony of Jessica. SO ORDERED.. The need for such counseling came about after the defilement she suffered in the hands of appellant. he began kissing the sensitive parts of her body. Then he placed himself on top of her and tried to have sexual intercourse with her..

97-159185 (the April 1994 rape incident).trial court’s decision reads: Anent Criminal Case No. there is no such crime as frustrated rape.21 (Emphasis Ours) The rape incidents which occurred in 1996 were designated as Criminal Case Nos. However. Likewise. 56 SCRA 666.31We award moral damages of P50. amending Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. In People vs. Thus. 694. However. the records further show that in November. the felony is consummated. People vs. in People vs. As in the previous occasions. the trial court was correct in not imposing the death penalty in Criminal Case Nos. Hernandez. elements and manner of execution of the crime of rape and jurisprudence on the matter. indisputable indications of slight penetration or. She resisted and told accused she might become pregnant. 1974. Orita. The Eriñia case. After her defilement.20Moreover. the victim continually cried and the accused tried to calm her down by assuring her that she would not be impregnated. 97-159184 and 97-159187 because the qualifying circumstances of age and relationship of the victim to the appellant were not alleged in the information.. he actually attains his purpose and. (emphasis ours) Thus.R. et al. constitute two separate crimes of qualified rape under R. Of course. Eriñia. as amended by Republic Act No. the conviction for frustrated rape should pertain to Criminal Case No. Jessica initially testified that. from that moment also all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished. 527. 97159185 and 97-159187 is further evidenced by the following paragraph found in page four of the trial court decision: In Criminal Case 97-159185 and 97-159184. The offender merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts. 980. We are aware of our earlier pronouncement in the case of People vs. perfect penetration is not essential. 559. and not merely stroked the external surface thereof. 97-159187 since this case refers to the November 1996 rape incident where the findings of the trial court was that there was carnal knowledge. the acts of the accused in having carnal knowledge of the victim by intimidation on two separate occasions in [the] early or middle part [of] 1996. there must be convincing and sufficient proof that the penis indeed touched the labia or slid into the female organ. The Court is not unaware that Republic Act No. for the penalty of death when the rape is attempted or frustrated and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof. it was error for the trial court to convict appellant of frustrated rape. because she has not yet began to have menstruation (p.000 for each count of rape as moral damages are automatically awarded to rape victims without need of pleading or proof. L-32996. Taking into account the nature.m. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender. 97-159184 and 97-159187. 7659 and the penalty prescribed therefore is death by lethal injection. we find that the rape was in fact consummated. 1974. has retained the provision penalizing with reclusion perpetua to death an accused who commits homicide by reason or on the occasion of an attempted or frustrated rape. because he has performed the last act necessary to produce the crime. We are aware of Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. Necessarily.23 Recently. 50 Phil. appellant can only be convicted of simple rape punishable by reclusion perpetua under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code.26It has been held that. in its penultimate paragraph. the appellant can be convicted of statutory rape also punishable by reclusion perpetua under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code inasmuch as the age of Jessica was alleged in the information30 and duly proven during the trial by the presentation of her birth certificate. We have set the uniform rule that for the consummation of rape. Jessica testified that the appellant was able to slightly penetrate her because she felt pain and her vagina bled. at around 11:00 p. when accused again made sexual advances to her. Thus.25 In response to the clarificatory questions asked by the prosecutor.28 In the present case. or the hymenal tags are no longer visible. which is distinct from moral damages. Pursuant to Section 11 of RA 7659 or the Heinous Crimes Law. but the accused persisted and threatened to kill her at that very moment if she would not submit to his lust. 998 [1927] where Wefound the offender guilty of frustrated rape there being no conclusive evidence of penetration of the genital organ of the offended party. Royeras. Besides. Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient. is mandatory upon the finding of the fact of . without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction. 97159185 and not Criminal Case No. to be convicted of rape. Jessica was watching TV while the other siblings were asleep and her mother was away. However. Oscar. People vs. it is hardly conceivable how the frustrated stage in rape can ever be committed.29 Thus. United States vs. Until Congress sees it fit to define the term frustrated rape and thereby penalize it. Garcia.27Nevertheless. 9 Phil. 3. 53 Phil.R.. the victim testified that she felt pain and her vagina bled. G. 4111 (dated March 29. 97-159185 and not Criminal Case No. the Court will see its continued usage in the statute book as being merely a persistent lapse in language. the appellant should be found guilty of (consummated) rape and not merely frustrated or attempted rape. 1965) which provides. No. 1996. Tayaba. 7659. that the penis indeed touched the labia and not merely stroked the external surface thereof.000 for each count of rape in the light of the ruling that civil indemnity. the penalty of death is imposed if rape is committed when the victim is under 18 years of age and the offender is the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim. 97-159187. he again succeeded in having carnal knowledge of the helpless and scared victim. No. might have prompted the law-making body to include the crime of frustrated rape in the amendments introduced by said laws. 97-159185 and 97159186. she felt his sex organ touch hers and she saw and felt semen come out of his penis and smear her vagina. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ.22 Thus. from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim. as we have ruled in a long line of cases. the Court sustains appellant’s contention that there is no such crime as frustrated rape. at the very least. L-31886. or the medicolegal examination finds discoloration in the inner lips of the vagina. in the crime of rape. People vs.32 We also award civil indemnity ex delicto of P50. 97159187. We are of the opinion that this particular provision on frustrated rape is a dead provision. 49 Phil. it appears that this is a ‘stray’ decision inasmuch as it has not been reiterated in Our subsequent decisions. 1960) and Republic Act No. the oversight of the court a quo in interchanging Criminal Case Nos. 2632 (dated September 12. 58 SCRA 505).A. and in November of the same year. August 21. or the labia minora is already gaping with redness. Rabadan. People vs. in Criminal Case Nos. April 29. In a long line of cases (People vs.24we again reiterated the rule: Let it be said once again that. as borne out by the informations filed by the City Prosecutor. although appellant did not succeed in inserting his penis in her vagina. 62 Phil. G. rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the female organ (People vs. after a careful review of the records. Decision) Consequently the conviction for frustrated rape should pertain to the incident in April 1994 described in Criminal Case No. 48 Phil. Quinanola. supra. Amores. as the Revised Penal Code presently so stands.Regarding Criminal Case No. the Court has explicitly pronounced: Clearly. 434) because not all acts of execution was performed. we have also ruled in cases where penetration is not established that the rape is deemed consummated if the victim felt pain.

short pants.000 as exemplary damages.14On the evening of June 16. as the evidence on record shows the presence of all the elements of this crime. what is it that happened on that particular day and time that is unusual? A: It was like somebody was embracing me or hugging me.000 as moral damages. AAA and her two (2) siblings went to the Women and Children’s Desk of the Mandaluyong City Police Station and reported the incident. at Block 19. went to the municipal hall to ask for financialassistance for his wife who was confined in the hospital. AAA did not answer. and to indemnify the victim. P50. 2007 decision2of the Regional Trial Court (RTC). Branch 209. considering that it is the central element in the crime of rape. He added that the victim’s testimony was incredible and contrary to human experience. DDD. 2003.20 "Carnal knowledge is defined as the act of a man having sexual intercourse or sexual bodily connections with a woman. in Criminal Case Nos. finding appellant Christopher Pareja guilty beyondreasonable doubt of the crime of rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. the doctor told him that his wife needed blood. the above-named accused. Q: Whom are you referring to? A: My brother-in-law. rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman with the use of force. forced him to admit the crime. THE COURT’S RULINGWe find that the prosecution failed to prove the appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of consummated rape. accompanied by his mother and brotherin-law. For each count of rape.33We likewise award exemplary damages of P25. against her will and consent. 2. and narrated to her what had happened. 97-159 184 to 87 is AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS: 1. of June 16. appellant is ordered to pay complainant Jessica Castro P50. sister of the common law spouse of accused.m. but the latter was not in his house. ma’am. 4. THE CASEThe prosecution charged the appellant before the RTC with the crime of rape under an Amended Information that reads: That on or about the 16th day of June 2003. when the appellant hugged her and kissed her nape and neck.7 The appellant went on top of AAA. and then placed him in a detention cell. appellant is convicted of simple rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. 3. D E C I S I O N BRION. on the floor of her sister’s room. the appellant left the room.000 as civil indemnity and P25.11 AAA went to the house of her other brother. At around 10:00 p.9 AAA covered herself with a blanket and cried. Mandaluyong City.m. BBB. The appellant put his clothes back on. AAA kicked the appellant’s upper thigh as the latter was about to stand up. appellant is convicted of statutory rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. We convict him instead of attempted rape.. or when she is under 12 years of age or is demented.R. 2003. 97-159186. In Criminal Case No.12For his defense. AAA resisted. Appellant. vs. In Criminal Case No. and instead hurled invectives at CCC. Appellee. ma’am.000.13 On the next day. AAA. 2007."21 Carnal knowledge of the victim by the accused must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. CR HC No. what did you do? A: I didn’t mind it because I thought that the person beside me just moved and when he made the movement. Upon arrival at the hospital. TheCA affirmed the February 22.16 The RTC convicted the appellant of rape in its decision of February 22. 2009. two policemen entered his house and informed him that a complaint for attempted rape had been filed against him.22In her testimony of February 9. Philippines. 97-159187. appellant is convicted of statutory rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. 2004.rape. The appellate court further ruled that the presence of people in the other room did not make it impossible for the appellant to have raped the victim. threat or intimidation. in its decision dated June 15. and then tried to insert his penis into her vagina. and threatened to kill AAA if she disclosed the incident to anyone. or a total of P500. and underwear. in the City of Mandaluyong.15 The appellant added that he filed a complaint before the Office of the Ombudsman against the police officers who beat him up. In Criminal Case No. the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Manila. and held that a slight penetration took place when the appellant’s penis touched AAA’s vagina as he was trying to insert it. it’s like that I was embraced. ma’am. thus debasing and/or demeaning the intrinsic worth and dignity of the victim thereby prejudicing her normal development as a child. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.5AAA cried. the amount of P 50. he went to his room and slept. Immediately after. Afterwards.000 for each count of rape consistent with the prevailing jurisprudence on the matter.000. AAA was sleeping beside her two-year old nephew. appellant is convicted of simple rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Costs against appellant. In Criminal Case No. AAA recounted the alleged rape. 2003. CCC. Q: And after . It explained that a slight penetration of the labia by the male organ is sufficient to constitute rape. 02759.8 The appellant stopped when AAA’s cry got louder. the appellant. affirmed the RTC decision. Fabella Compound. SO ORDERED. located at Block 38. The police brought him to the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group.19 the appellant argued that the lower courts erred in convicting him for the crime of rape.313 years of age. and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. AAA proceeded to the house of her older sister. Branch 18. and held her hands. the Court finds accused CHRISTOPHER PAREJA y VELASCO GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of RAPE and hereby sentences him as he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. under the following terms: WHEREFORE. unlawfully and feloniously lie and have carnal knowledge of AAA.00 as civil indemnity. on the evening of June 15. 97-159 184.10At around 6:00 a.18In his brief. 97-159 185. mauled him. or when she is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious. and while the appellant was folding the clothes of his son.000. Carnal Knowledge Not Proven With Moral CertaintyBy definition. because lust is no respecter of time and place. J. the appellant and his companions went to Pasig City to find blood donors.:This is an appeal from the June 15. Q: When you felt that some (sic) is embracing and hugging you. as follows: FISCAL TRONCO: Q: You said that the three of you then was (sic) sleeping on the floor.17The CA. CHRISTOPHER PAREJA y VELASCO. It also held that the victim’s lack of tenacity in resisting the appellant’s sexual aggression did not amount to consent or voluntary submission to the criminal act. Welfareville Compound. but the appellant covered her and BBB with a blanket. went to her room and asked her why she was lying on the floor and crying. as the prosecution failed to prove even the slightest penetration of his penis into the victim’s vagina.00 as moral damages and P 50. Immediately after.4The evidence for the prosecution disclosed that at around 3:30 a. he then took off his short pants and briefs.6 The appellant removed AAA’s clothes. but the appellant parted her legs using his own legs. 2009 decision1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G. AAA’s brother. of the same day. the appellant declared on the witness stand that he hauled "filling materials" at his house.m.34WHEREFORE. did then and there willfully.

thus: Thus.29 we ruled that when the "touching" of the vagina by the penis is coupled with the intent to penetrate. AAA? A: Before that happened. hence. but merely ‘touched’ (i. ma’am. ma’am. ma’am. I saw that it was my brother-in-law. Q: What about him? A: He was on my lap. The mons pubis is the rounded eminence that becomes hairy after puberty.25 the Court laid down the parameters of genital contact in rape cases. labia minora. Q: Could you please tell us how did (sic) he able to part your legs? A: He did that with his legs while he was holding my hands. emphasis ours) From the foregoing.23 (italics supplied. Aside from AAA’s testimony. Q: What was your position while he was kissing your neck? A: I was on my side at that time and I was also crying. nothing in the records supports the CA’s conclusion that the appellant’s penis penetrated. my brother-in-law covered me and my nephew with a blanket and he tried to get my clothes off. and not merely for the penis to stroke the surface of the female organ. Q: How did you know that he was trying to insert his sexual organ? A: "Naidikit po niya sa ari ko. stroking or grazing of organs. are by their natural situs or location beneath the mons pubis or the vaginal surface. i. ma’am. AAA? A: Yes. or the mons pubis. the appellant commenced the commission of rape by the following overt acts: kissing AAA’s nape and neck. The next layer is the labia majora or the outer lips of the female organ composed of the outer convex surface and the inner surface. Q: And when he was able to part your legs. as amended."28As earlier discussed. ma’am. if not acts of lasciviousness. and at some point in time I felt weak and he was able to part my legs. ma’am. Q: Aside from that incident that he was kissing your neck."27 Without any showing of such penetration. I slept again and brought him down again and then "dumapa po ako" and I felt that somebody was kissing my nape. and is instantly visible within the surface. AAA? A: Also on said date. Thus. ma’am. undressing her. ma’am. ma’am. I was able to kicked (sic) his upper thigh. ma’am. In People v. the conclusion that touching the labia majora or the labia minora of the pudendum constitutes consummated rape. x x x x Q: You said that you saw him take off his short pants? A: Yes. a slight brush or a scrape of the penis on the external layer of the victim's vagina. the vaginal orifice. there can be no consummated rape. states that there is an attempt when the offender commenced the commission of the crime directly by overt acts but does not perform all the acts of execution by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. AAA? A: After removing his undergarments. Directly beneath the labia majora is the labia minora. it can only be attempted rape.. my nephew cried and so I picked him up and put him on my chest and after a while. In the present case. I hit my wrist on the wall and my wrist was "nagasgas. the victim’s female organ. while the inner surface is a thin skin which does not have any hair but has many sebaceous glands. if any. I looked on my side where the room was not that dark that I could not see the person and so. the appellant cannot be convicted of consummated rape. ma’am. labia majora. to touch them with the penis is to attain some degree of penetration beneath the surface. ma’am.26 (italics supplied) Simply put." ma’am. Significantly. Jurisprudence dictates that the labia majora must be entered for rape to be consummated. such as a medico-legal report. and not merely stroked the external surface thereof. ma’am. This circumstance – coupled with the victim’s declaration that she was resisting the appellant’s attempt to insert his penis into her vagina – makes penile penetration highly difficult. x x x x Q: Did he also take off his brief? A: Yes. at most. I was still resisting at that time. As the labias. was there any other previous incident that happened? A: Yes. x x x x Q: When you saw that it was your brother-in-law kissing your nape while you were on a prone position. Publico. ma’am. x x x x Q: And were you able to successfully resist? A: Yes. what was your position at that time? A: I was lying down."Q: Which part of your body was he able to touch his sexual organ? (sic) A: On my sexual organ. however slightly. of the victim’s labias. as in this case. the victim confirmed on cross-examination that the appellant did not succeed in inserting his penis into her vagina. etc. Q: When did this happen. In the absence of testimonial or physical evidence to establish penile penetration. he suddenly brought his body on top of me and he held my hands. otherwise. ma’am. could confirm whether there indeed had been penetration. Q: You said that he covered you and your nephew with a blanket and then taking (sic) off your clothes? A: Yes. touching when applied to rape cases does not simply mean mere epidermal contact. for an accused to be convicted of consummated rape. AAA’s Sinumpaang Salaysay24 also disclosed that the appellant was holding the victim’s hand when he was trying to insert his penis in her vagina. attempted rape is committed. Absent any showing of the slightest penetration of the female organ. The skin of the outer convex surface is covered with hair follicles and is pigmented. There must be sufficient and convincing proof that the penis indeed touched the labias or slid into the female organ. AAA’s private part. ma’am. however slight. if any?A: He kissed my neck. ma’am. ma’am. Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code. the crime committed is merely acts of lasciviousness. Significantly. which are required to be "touched" by the penis. what did you do. the prosecution failed to present sufficient and convincing evidence to establish the required penile penetration. ma’am. the hymen. x x x x Q: You said that he was trying to take off your clothes and undergarments. "rape is consummated by the slightest penile penetration of the labia majora or pudendum of the female organ. ma’am. x x x x Q: Was he able to take off your clothes? A: Yes. removing his clothes and briefs. what happened after that?A: I cried and then while I was resisting. x x x x Q: What incident was that? A: At that time. it can only be attempted rape [or] acts of lasciviousness.. x x x x Q: You mentioned earlier that he was not able to penetrate your private part. x x x x Q: Why were you crying at that time while he was kissing your neck? A: I was afraid of what will happen next. no other evidence on record. Q: Were you able to see who was that somebody kissing your nape? A: When I tried to evade. touching of either labia of the pudendum by the penis. a grazing of the surface of the female organ or touching the mons pubis of the pudendum is not sufficient to constitute consummated rape. Q: What particular clothing was he able to take off? A: My short pants and underwear. Q: While he was taking off your short pants and your underwear. mons pubis.. if any? A: I tried to fight him off.e. there can be no consummated rape. The pudendum or vulva is the collective term for the female genital organs that are visible in the perineal area. if not improbable. lying on top . Campuhan. At that time I was crying and still resisting and then he was trying to get my legs apart."naidikit"). x x x x Q: And after that what happened.g. ma’am. In fact. ma’am. ma’am. e. the clitoris. AAA’s testimony did not establish that the appellant’s penis touched the labias or slid into her private part. at most. Q: So. Did the touching by the appellant’s penis of the victim’s private part amount to carnal knowledge such that the appellant should be held guilty of consummated rape? InPeople v. what happened next? A: He tried to insert his sexual organ but he was not able to do so.that. we find it clear that the appellant’s penis did not penetrate. what else happened. what else happened.e.

she categorically stated that the accused was not able to insert his penis into her private parts because she was moving her hips away. and convicted him instead only of attempted rape after failing to discern from the victim's testimony that the accused attained some degree of penile penetration. as there was paucity of evidence that the slightest penetration ever took place. A review of jurisprudence reveals that the Court has not hesitated to strike down convictions for consummated rape when the evidence failed to show that penetration.34 the evidence for the prosecution consisted only of the victim’s testimony that the accused tried.00 as moral damages and P 10. however slight.R. In the present case. 02759 isMODIFIED. The Court set aside the accused’s conviction for three (3) counts of rape and found him guilty of attempted rape only. however. as follows: The appellant's conviction for the crime of rape is VACATED. No. The Proper Penalty and IndemnitiesUnder Article 51 of the Revised Penal Code. and P 10. we held that there was no showing that the accused’s penis entered the victim’s vagina. failed to perform all the acts of execution which should produce the crime of rape by reason of a cause other than his own spontaneous desistance. as maximum. in People v. We added that the pain that the victim felt might have been caused by the accused’s failed attempts to insert his organ into her vagina.R.000.30 the Court found the appellant guilty of attempted rape only. DECISION . and (1) we find appellant Christopher Pareja y Velasco GUILTY of the crime of ATTEMPTED RAPE. P 25. that the appellant’s act of inserting his fingers would have constituted rape through sexual assault had the offense occurred after the effectivity of the Anti-Rape Law of 1997. holding her hands and parting her legs. as maximum. In People v. because we found the victim’s testimony too ambiguous to prove the vital element of penile penetration. strongest suspicion must not be permitted to sway judgment.40 the Court refused to convict the accused for consummated rape on the basis of the victim's testimony that she felt the accused's penis pressed against her vagina as he tried to insert it. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES. The Court set aside the accused’s conviction for rape. in People v. 166441 October 8. which is prision correccional whose range is six (6) months and one (1) day to six (6) years. Petitioner. in any of its periods. We further held that the appellant could not be convicted of consummated rape by presuming carnal knowledge out of pain. Accordingly.43WHEREFORE. we order the appellant to pay the victim P 30. we sentence the appellant to suffer the indeterminate penalty of six (6) years of prision correccional. Jr. "In rape cases. the victim testified that the accused placed his penis on top of her vagina. In this case.00 as moral damages. but failed. Francisco. to insert his penis into her vagina. 2009 decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G. We added that the victim’s testimony was "replete with repeated denial of penile insertion. We noted. the prosecution bears the primary duty to present its case with clarity and persuasion. Bon. InPeople v.38 the Court found the accused guilty of attempted rape only. to the end that conviction becomes the only logical and inevitable conclusion. InPeople v. The Court set aside the accused’s conviction for qualified rape. CR HC No. Without any attendant aggravating or mitigating circumstances and applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law. On the contrary. The totality of the appellant’s acts demonstrated the unmistakable objective to insert his penis into the victim’s private parts.000. The Court had a similar ruling in People v. In addition. but failed to secure penetration. and claimed that it touched her private parts.32 the victim declared that the accused placed his penis on her vagina. In finding the accused guilty of attempted rape only.1âwphi1InPeople v. which was necessary to consummate rape. the maximum of the penalty to be imposed upon the appellant is prision mayor in its medium period. but was unsuccessful.000. and trying to insert his penis into her vagina. which was necessary to consummate rape. Respondent. Dimapilis. as minimum. Two degrees lower from reclusion perpetua is prision mayor whose range is six (6) years and one (1) day to 12 years.41 the Court reversed the accused’s conviction for rape and convicted him of attempted rape only. the prosecution failed to discharge its burden of proving all the elements of consummated rape.000. to 10 years of prision mayor. Miranda."33Similarly. We explained that in order to constitute consummated rape. while the minimum shall be taken from the penalty next lower in degree. and convicted him of attempted rape only. vs.. InPeople v. G. Finally.00 as civil indemnity.00 as exemplary damages.39 the victim testified that the accused "poked" her vagina. so he inserted his fingers instead. In People v.of her. The appellant. Monteron36 is another noteworthy case where the Court set aside the appellant’s conviction for rape.31 where the accused tried to insert his penis into the victim’s private parts. as there was no indication that the appellant’s penis even touched the labia of the pudendum of the victim. We reasoned out that the victim’s statements that the accused was "trying to force his sex organ into mine" and "binundol-undol ang kanyang ari" did not prove that the accused’s penis reached the labia of the pudendum of the victim’s vagina. the imposable penalty for attempted rape is two degrees lower than the prescribed penalty of reclusion perpetua for consummated rape.. Arce. premises considered. the June 15. P 25."42 We emphasize that a conviction cannot be made to rest on possibilities. SO ORDERED. We further ruled that the victim’s attempt to demonstrate what she meant by "idinidikit ang ari" was unavailing to prove that rape had been consummated. there must be entry into the vagina of the victim.35 the Court also set aside the appellant’s conviction for rape because no proof was adduced of even the slightest penetration of the female organ. and that she felt pain. as minimum. the Court reversed the accused’s conviction for rape. in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence on attempted rape cases. and she felt pain in the process. i.000.00 as exemplary damages. InPeople v. Mariano.000.37 the accused tried to insert his penis into the victim’s vagina. the victim's loud cries and resistance. of the victim’s vagina took place. however. No medico-legal examination report was presented in evidence. even if only in the slightest degree.e. We convicted the accused of attempted rape only due to lack of evidence to establish that there was even a slight penile penetration." People v. and (3) we ORDERhim to PAY the victim the amounts of P 30. We explained the necessity of carefully ascertaining whether the penis of the accused in reality entered the labial threshold of the female organ to accurately conclude that rape had been consummated. and found him guilty of attempted rape only. because the victim did not declare that there was the slightest penetration. Accordingly. aside from a general statement of the victim that she had been "raped. Alibuyog. Ocomen.(2) we SENTENCE him to suffer the indeterminate penalty of six ( 6) years of prision correccional. Tolentino. to 10 years of prision mayor. 2014 NORBERTO CRUZ y BARTOLOME.00 as civil indemnity. Quarre.

La Union which was then celebrating its fiesta. she saw Norberto touching the private parts of BBB. AAA and BBB went straight to the municipal hall where they met a policeman by the name of "Sabas". Norberto was summoned to where he personally confronted his Norberto’s wife. Lingayen. in Balaoan. unlawfully and feloniously touch the vagina of [BBB]4 against the latter’s will and with no other purpose but to satisfy his lascivious desire to the damage and prejudice of said offended party. Branch 34. When police station. 1994. 2004. Two tents were fixed in order that they will have a place to sleep. 2388 Attempted Rape That on or about the 21st day of December 1993. When she finally entered the tent. 1994. while they were on their way to fetch water. the police investigator ordered the complainants to return at6:00 o’clock in the morning.000. the above-named accused with lewd design.1 whereby the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction for attempted rape of the petitioner by the Regional Trial Court. AAA and BBB narrated to Jess the incident that took place that early morning. after which they were sent back to Lingayen. along the Bangar-Luna Road. Municipality of Bangar.00 to AAA. Norberto was mashing her breast and touching her private part. they parked in front of Maroon enterprises. Later still. Municipality of Bangar. at around 8:00 in the evening of December 20. 1993. In the evening of December 21. as maximum. merely climbing on top of a naked female does not constitute attempted rape without proof of his erectile penis being in a position to penetrate the female's vagina. at about 2:00 o'clock in the morning. and imposing on him the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional. she will be killed. CONTRARY TO LAW. Thirty minutes later. La Union. 2. Norberto offered her money and told her not totell the incident to her mother otherwise. said accused. at around 2:20 o’clock in the morning. arrived at the argument ensued between them. Norberto ordered her not to scream or she’ll be killed. On December 21. to wit: While private complainant AAA. Only the direct overt acts of the offender establish the intent to lie with the female. did then and there willfully. On January 10. Belinda and the driver proceeded to Manila in order to get more goods to be sold. Pangasinan. Pangasinan to Bangar. AAA and BBB asked the people around where they can find the municipal building. Upon reaching Bangar.5 x x x [Petitioner] Norberto Bartolome and [his wife] Belinda Cruz were engaged in the selling of plastic wares and glass wares in different municipalities around the country. to wit: Criminal Case No. made to them by the police station accusers. Barangay Central West No.: Version of the Prosecution The intent of the offender to lie with the female defines the distinction between attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness. Belinda. Ruben Rodriguez (driver) and a sales boy by the name of "Jess". Antecedents The petitioner was charged in the RTC with attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness involving different victims. AAA went out of the tent to seek help from Jess (the house boy) but she failed to wake him up. 2.2 the victim. 2389 Acts of Lasciviousness That on or about the 21st day of December 1993. fifteen (15) yearsold. when AAA returned to their tent. AAA and BBB went to sleep. at about 3:00 o’clock in the morning. J. The felony of attempted rape requires such intent. However. Barangay Central West No. the said accused remove her panty and underwear and lay on top of said AAA embracing and touching her vagina and breast with intent of having carnal knowledge of her by means of force. Norberto was not able to pursue his lustful desires. Later that day. and ordering him to pay moral damages of P20. Province of La Union. was sleeping inside the tentalong Bangar-Luna Road. They told Sabas the sexual advances Norberto. The young girls were accompanied by Norberto. did then and there willfully.BERSAMIN. They brought out all the goods and wares for display. At arraignment. at around 1:00 o’clock in the morning. 1993. an unmarried woman. AAA was awakened when she felt that somebody was on top of her. La Union. Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. along the Bangar-Luna Road. CONTRARY TO LAW. and if the accused did not accomplish his purpose that is to have carnal knowledge of the said AAA it was not because of his voluntary desistance but because the said offended party succeeded in resisting the criminal attempt of said accused to the damage and prejudice of said offended party. as minimum. An old woman pointed to them the place. an On December 22. he pleaded not guiltyto the respective informations. She fought back and kicked Norberto twice. AAA realized that she was divested of her clothing and that she was totally naked. Less thanan hour later. 1993. AAA tried to push Norberto away and pleaded to have pity on her but her pleas fell on deaf ears. AAA saw her companion awake but her hands wereshaking. Norberto left and went outside. On December 20.3 Criminal Case No. AAA and BBB boarded a passenger jeepney owned by Norberto. La Union (RTC). unlawfully and feloniously and by means of force and intimidation commenced the commission ofrape directly byovert acts.Province of La Union. From Libsong East. 1993. 1993. Belinda. . Norberto and Belinda employed AAA and BBB to help them in selling their wares in Bangar. Norberto and Belinda were still able to bring AAA and BBB home with them and worked for them until December 30. to ten (10) years of prision mayor. Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. AAA and BBB went back to La Union and executed their respective sworn statements against Norberto. The CA summarized the version of the Prosecution as follows:6 The Case This appeal examines the decision promulgated on July 26. the felony of acts of lasciviousness does not.

particularly: The preventive imprisonment suffered by the accused by reason of the two cases is counted in his favor. In sum. and of acts of lasciviousness despite the fact that BBB did not testify. 2389 due to the insufficiency of the evidence. 2004.9 II. when the victim is aged 13 to 19. 2000 finding the petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of attempted rape in Criminal Case No. not to mention the fact that once AAA and BBB would scream. We also find that the trial court correctly assessed the amount of P20. moral damages may be awarded without the need of proof or pleading since it is assumed that the private complainant suffered moral injuries.7 as follows: In a bid to exculpate himself. that her testimony about his having been on top of her for nearly an hour while they struggled was also inconceivable unless she either consented to his act and yielded to his lust. thereby belying his commission of the crime against her. Considering the location of the tents.00 as moral damages. the maximum term of the penalty shall be the medium period of prision mayorin the absence of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance and the minimum shall be within the range of the penalty nextlower to that prescribed for the offense which in this case is prision correccionalin any of its periods. and SO ORDERED. The penalty two degrees lower than reclusion perpetuais prision mayor. because her bra was locked at her back. Judgment of the RTC After the joint trial of the two criminal cases. He believes that the reason why the complainants filed these cases against him was solely for the purpose of extorting money from him. On the date of the alleged incident. Under Article 51 of the Revised Penal Code. In a rape case. the Court hereby sentences the accused to suffer an indeterminate penalty of imprisonment from FOUR (4) MONTHS ARRESTO MAYOR as Minimum to FOUR (4) YEARS and TWO (2) MONTHS PRISION CORRECCIONAL as Maximum and the accessory penalties provided for by law. as amended by Republic Act No. In this case. BBB did not testify and neither her sworn statement was formally offered in evidence to support the charge for acts of lasciviousness. the petitioner assails the behavior and credibility of AAA. In giving credence to the incredulous and unbelievable testimony of the alleged victim. that he could not have undressed her without rousing her if she had gone to sleep only an hour before. the penalty for rape if it had been consummated would have been reclusion perpetuapursuant to Article 335 of the Revised Penalty Code. the overall integrity and probative value of the prosecution's evidence insofar as AAA is concerned. While AAA claims that she personally saw the accused touching the private parts of BBB. 7659.11 Issues In this appeal. I. the policemen in the municipal hall could hear them. 2389. in the light of the foregoing. and to pay the victim BBBthe amount of P10. 2388. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law. the Court hereby renders judgment declaring the accused NORBERTO CRUZ Y BARTOLOME guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of ATTEMPTED RAPE and ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS as defined and penalized in Article 335 in relation with (sic) Article 6. With respect to the crime of ATTEMPTED RAPE. or the incident did not happen at all. His version was presented in the assailed decision of the CA. more so. Insofar as the crime of acts of lasciviousness committed against BBB. The basis of the complaint for acts of lasciviousness is the sworn statement of BBB to the effectthat the accused-appellant likewise molested her by mashing her breast and touching her private part. However. 1994. the penalty for an attempted felony is the "penalty lower by two (2) degrees" prescribed by law for the consummated felony.000. the evidence adducedby the prosecution is insufficient to substantiate the charge of acts of lasciviousness against the accusedappellant. she was not presented to testify. He argues that AAA still continued working for him and his wife until December 30. the petitioner contended that the RTC gravely erred in convicting him of attempted rape despite the dubious credibility of AAA. even slightly. par. he could not possibly do the dastardly acts out in the open. Decision of the CA On appeal. the Court hereby sentences the accused to suffer an indeterminate penalty of imprisonment from FOUR (4) YEARS and TWO (2) MONTHS PRISION CORRECCIONAL as Minimum to TEN (10) YEARS PRISION MAYOR as Maximum and the accessory penalties provided for by law and to pay the victim AAA the amount of P20. In convicting the accused notwithstanding the failure of the prosecution to prove the guilt of the petitioner beyond reasonable doubt. there was no testimony to the effect that suchlascivious acts were without the consent or against the will of BBB. 1994 despite the alleged attempted rape in the early morning of December 21. the petitioner posits that the CA’s decision was not in accord with law or with jurisprudence. 2388 and acts of lasciviousness in Criminal Case No. The accused maintains that it was not possible for him to commit the crimes hurled against him. the CA promulgated its decision affirming the conviction of the petitioner for attempted rape in Criminal Case No.Version of the Defense The petitioner denied the criminal acts imputed to him. the RTC rendered its judgment on April 6.10 holding thusly: Anent the first issue. 3 and Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code respectively.8 to wit: WHEREFORE.00 by way of moral damages against the accused-appellant. With regard to the crime ofACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS. there were many people around who were preparing for the "simbang gabi". but acquitting him of the acts of lasciviousness charged in Criminal Case No. the arguments of the accused-appellant are too puerile and inconsequential as to dent. In this case.000. the accused argues that there is not enough evidence to support such accusation. which were near the road and the municipal hall.000. being the product only of her .00 as moral damages. accused-appellant presents a totally different version of the story. On July 26.

Campuhan. the offender must commence the commission of the felony directly by overt acts. Lamahang.12 On the second issue. The basic element of rape then and now is carnal knowledge of a female. and 3. withoutthe intent to commit an offense. When and how rape is committed. 1993. rape is consummated once the peniscapable of consummating the sexual act touches the external genitalia of the female. indeed. That law was Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code.14 the Court. that. 99) that in offenses not consummated. stroking or grazing of organs. eruditely expounded on what overt acts would constitute anattempted felony. and which show an innocent aswell as a punishable act. which pertinently provided as follows: Article335. speaking through the eminent Justice Claro M. the petitioner assails the glaring inconsistencies in the testimony of AAA that cast doubt on her veracity. for the purpose of imposing penal sanction. but the same must be inferred from the nature of the acts of execution (accion medio). supra. having themselves heard and seen the witnesses and observed firsthand their demeanor and deportment and the manner of testifying under exacting examination. By using force or intimidation. and if the accused did not accomplish his purpose that is to have carnal knowledge of the said AAA it was not because of his voluntary desistance but because the said offended party succeeded in resisting the criminal attempt of said accused to the damage and prejudice of said offended party. This must have been the intention of the legislator in requiring that in order for an attempt to exist. as the material damage iswanting. that they are aimed at the consummation of a crime. There is an attempt. to wit: It is our opinion that the attempt to commit an offense which the Penal Code punishes is that which has a logical relation to a particular. Moreover. that the record does not indicate if he himself was also naked. He thereby raises questions of fact that are outside the scope of this appeal. that the trial courts are in the best position to decideissues of credibility of witnesses. the nature of the action intended (accion fin) cannot exactly be ascertained. we have to determine the law on rape in effect on December 21. like the logical and natural relation of the cause and its effect. under threat that she would file a case against him. when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts. and that she and her mother demanded from him P80. constituted attempted rape. he thereby proposes to have the Court. The attempt to commit an indeterminate offense. upon its consummation. leading directly to its realization and consummation. No review of the findings of fact by the CA is involved. the necessity that these acts be such that by their very nature. As such. which is not a trier of facts. a slight brush or a scrape of the penis on the external layer . In People v. Hence. In other words. Conformably with this limitation. inasmuch as its nature in relation to its objective is ambiguous. the intention must be ascertainedfrom the facts and therefore it is necessary. The relation existing between the facts submitted for appreciation and the offense of which said facts are supposed to produce must be direct. Acts susceptible of double interpretation. in favor as well as against the culprit. "It must be borne in mind (I Groizard. must not and cannot furnish grounds by themselves for attempted or frustrated crimes. x x x x. concrete offense. Based on the information.13 the Court reviews only questions of law. — Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: 1. Carnal knowledge isdefined simply as "theact of a man having sexual bodily connections with a woman. in order to avoid regrettable instance of injustice. the Court accords the highest respect for the factual findings of the trial court. Judicial experience has shown. by the circumstances of the persons performing the same. xxxx But it is not sufficient. by the facts to which they are related. its assessment of the credibility of witnesses and the probative weight of their testimonies and the conclusions drawn from its factual findings. that the acts performed must be such that. or that his penis was poised to penetrate her. When the woman is under twelve years of age. without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the voluntary desistance of the perpetrator. when the petitioner committed the crime he was convicted of. which is the beginning of the execution of the offense by overt acts of the perpetrator. When the woman is deprived ofreason or otherwise unconscious.18 the Court has defined the extent of "touching" by the penis in rape in the following terms: [T]ouching when applied to rape cases does not simply mean mere epidermal contact." establish its unavoidable connection. our review focuses only on determining the question of law of whether or not the petitioner’s climbing on top of the undressed AAA such thatthey faced each other.fertileimagination. particularly when they are affirmed by the CA.Recto. it is necessary to prove that said beginning of execution.000. and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than this own spontaneous desistance.17 In People v. they must show without any doubt.00 as settlement. that an act objectively performed constitute a mere beginning of execution. is not a juridical fact from the standpoint of the Penal Code."15 To ascertain whether the acts performed by the petitioner constituted attempted rape. that the mind be able to directly infer from them the intention of the perpetrator to cause a particular injury. and by the things connected therewith. As a consequence of thisrule. with the deed which. they would be meaningless. that is. will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. according to Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code. p. that is to say. if carried to its complete termination following its natural course. it is necessary to 2. the contentionsof the petitioner on the credibility of AAA as a witness for the State cannot beentertained. review the entire evidence adduced by the Prosecution and the Defense."16 which explains why the slightest penetration of the female genitalia consummates the rape. the crime for which the RTC and the CA convicted and punished him. In an appeal under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. Ruling of the Court The appeal is partly meritorious. will develop into one of the offenses defined and punished by the Code. even though neither of the circumstances mentioned in the two next preceding paragraphs shall be present. with him mashing her breasts and touching her genitalia with his hands. he committed such acts "with intent of having carnal knowledge ofher by means of force.

27 His preparatory acts could include his putting up of the separate tents. It is necessary. indicating the intention to commit a particular crime. It is sufficient if it was the "first or some subsequent step in a direct movement towards the commission of the offense after the preparations are made. Obviously. for an accused to be convicted of consummated rape. being equivocal.23 that showing must be through his overt acts directly connected with rape.was his intended felony would be highly unwarranted. the concrete felony is rape. As the evolving case law on rape stands. Lizada:22 The petitioner climbed on top of the naked victim. Dominguez. In the words of Viada." as Justice Recto put in People v. at most. and his allowing his wife to leave for Manila earlier that evening to buy more wares. The skin of the outer convex surface is covered with hair follicles and is pigmented. being a mental act. no one can say with certainty what the intent of the accused is. It is that quality of being equivocal that must be lacking before the act becomes one which may be said to We clarify that the direct overt acts of the petitioner that would have produced attempted rape did not include equivocal preparatory acts. are by their natural situsor location beneath the mons pubisor the vaginal surface. penetration of the penis into the vagina. if not acts of lasciviousness. must show that his overt acts.21 be a commencement of the commission of the crime. before the interruption. The raison d’etrefor the law requiring a direct overtact is that. the vaginal orifice. and this is so for the reason that so long as the equivocal quality remains. to establish attempted rape. that the attempt must have a causal relation to the intended crime. etc. and to have sexual congress with her. a grazing of the surface of the female organ or touching the mons pubisof the pudendum is not sufficient to constitute consummated rape. such that it was not permissible to directly infer from them the intention to cause rape as the particular injury. There must be sufficient and convincing proof that the penis indeedtouched the labias or slid into the female organ. This was so." The act done need not constitute the last proximate one for completion. or the mons pubis. had no direct connection to rape. and no other. had no connection with rape as the intended crime. Accepting that intent. Such acts. Orita. the clitoris. Lamahang. Verily. In this connection. the hymen. The next layer is the labia majoraor the outer lips of the female organ composed of the outer convex surface and the inner surface. Jr. his felony would not exclusively be rapehad he been allowed by her to continue. Such circumstances remained equivocal. hence. . and was already touching her genitalia with his hands and mashing her breasts when she freed herself from his clutches and effectively ended his designs on her.e. touching of either labia of the pudendumby the penis. therefore.. (Bold emphasis supplied) In attempted rape. i. was a stray decisionfor not having been reiterated in subsequent cases. the conclusion that touching the labia majora or the labia minora of the pudendum constitutes consummated rape. xxxx Thus. As a rule.. more than a mere planning or preparation. but the latter. and (2) that the felony is not produced due to causes independent of the perpetrator’s will. The former would have related to his acts directly connected to rape as the intended crime. and the other for himself and his assistant. but the offender does not perform all the acts of execution of having carnal knowledge. as in this case. rape in its frustrated stage is a physical impossibility. e. Jurisprudence dictates that the labia majoramust be entered for rape to be consummated." Nonetheless. the overt acts must have an immediate and necessary relation to the offense. If the slightest penetration of the female genitalia consummates rape. as succinctly put in People v. An overt or external act is defined as some physical activity or deed. it can only be attempted rape. As the labias.It is necessary that the overt act should have been the ultimate step towards the consummation of the design.g. the offender attains his purpose from the moment he has carnal knowledge of his victim. Perforce. [Bold emphasis supplied] It is noteworthy that in People v. Eriñia20 whereby the offender was declared guilty of frustrated rapebecause of lack of conclusive evidence of penetration of the genital organ of the offended party. or an overt act or before any fragment of the crime itself has been committed. leaving nothing more to be done by him. which if carried out to its complete termination following its natural course. and is instantly visible within the surface. despite his lust for and lewd designs towards her being fully manifest. for some other felony like simple seduction (if he should employ deceit to have her yield to him)26 could also be ultimate felony. Absent any showing of the slightest penetration of the female organ. should his criminalintent be carried to its complete termination without being thwarted by extraneous matters. or "susceptible of double interpretation. therefore.of the victim’s vagina. and not merely stroked the external surface thereof. In short. with one being for the use of AAA and BBB. labia minora. in a majority of cases.e. whether external or internal. his perpetration of the preparatory acts would not render him guilty of an attempt to commit such felony. i. and not merely for the penis to stroke the surface of the female organ. the conduct of the accused consisting merely of acts of preparation has never ceased to be equivocal.24 for. will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. The pudendumor vulvais the collective term for the female genital organs that are visible in the perineal area. irrespective of his declared intent. is beyond the sphere of criminal law. rape admits of an attempted stage.19 the Court clarified that the ruling in People v. and rape in its attempted stage requires the commencement of the commission of the felony directly by overt actswithout the offender performing all the acts of execution that should produce the felony. which are required to be "touched" bythe penis. the State. would ripen into rape. the character of the overt actsfor purposes of the attempted stage has been explained in People v. and this is necessarily so. however. there can be no consummated rape. inferring from such circumstances thatrape. supra. labia majora. the only means by which the overt acts performed by the accused can be shown to have a causal relation to rape as the intended crime is to make a clear showing of his intent to lie with the female. to touch them with the penis is to attain some degree of penetration beneath the surface. considering that the requisites of a frustrated felony under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Codeare that: (1) the offender has performed all the acts of execution which would produce the felony. mons pubis.:25 "The gauge in determining whether the crime of attempted rape had been committed is the commencement of the act of sexual intercourse. Yet. The mons pubisis the rounded eminence that becomes hairy after puberty. while the inner surface is a thin skin which does not have any hair but has many sebaceous glands.. Directly beneath the labia majorais the labia minora. without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the spontaneous desistance of the perpetrator. because from that moment all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished. He cannot be held liable for attempted rape withoutsuch overt acts demonstrating the intent to lie with the female.

namely: (a) the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness upon another person of either sex. by means of force and intimidation. unlawfully and feloniously commence the commission of the crime of Rape directly by overt acts. PENALIZES him with the indeterminate sentence of three (3) months of arresto mayor. moral shock. Article 2219. or (iii) when the offended party is under 12 years of age. His embracing her and touching her vagina and breasts did not directly manifest his intent to lie with her. by then and there kissing the nipples and the vagina of the undersigned [complainant]. undersigned complainant push[ed] him away.000. four (4) months and one day to four (4) years and two (2) months. lecherous. The intent to penetrate is manifest only through the showing of the penis capable of consummating the sexual act touching the external genitalia of the female. and similar injury. of the Civil Code expressly recognizes the right of the victim in acts of lasciviousness to recover moral damages. that is. besmirched reputation.38 In addition. ACCORDINGLY. he was guilty only of acts of lasciviousness. even from his own declaration of it. the Court.00. the Court FINDS and PRONOUNCES petitioner NORBERTO CRUZ y BARTOLOME guilty of ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS. if any. and. In acts of lasciviousness." With such allegation of the information being competently and satisfactorily proven beyond a reasonable doubt. ORDERS him to pay moral damages of P30.30 Without such showing. the penalty next lower than prision correccionalwhich ranges from one (1) month to six (6) months. SO ORDERED .000.39 Under Article 2211 of the Civil Code. serious anxiety. "did then and there willfully.00 shall earn interest of 6% per annum reckoned from the finality of this decision until full payment.34 where the accused was charged with attempted rape through an information alleging that he. fright. intent to lie with the female is indispensable. the minimum of the penalty should come from arresto mayor.40 WHEREFORE. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law. Accordingly. upon its appreciation of the record. In rape. lustful." The accused was held liable only for acts of lasciviousness because the intent to commit rape "is not apparent from the actdescribed. and about to lay on top of her. moral damages may be recovered if they are the proximate result of the defendant's wrongful act for omission.00 is a reasonable award of moral damages. as the minimum. however. is punished with prision correccional. which ranges from two (2) years. unless he committed overt acts directly leading to rape. being guilty of acts of lasciviousness. when the "touching" of the vagina by the penis is coupled with the intent to penetrate. and DIRECTS him to pay the costs of suit. AAA was entitled to recover civil indemnity of P20. the felony of acts of lasciviousness is consummated whenthe following essential elements concur. as the maximum.33 The information charged that the petitioner "remove[d] her panty and underwear and la[id] on top of said AAA embracing and touching her vagina and breast. his acts reflected lewdness and lust for her. did they constitute acts of lasciviousness? It is obvious that the fundamental difference between attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness is the offender’sintent to lie with the female.000. Though incapable of pecuniary computation. mental anguish. with interest of 6% per annum on such awards reckoned from the finality of this decision until full payment. wounded feelings.preparatory acts are not punishable under the Revised Penal Codefor as long as they remained equivocal or of uncertain significance.37 Towards that end.000. to two (2) years. all against her will. to two (2) years. In that regard. decrees that P30. but this element is not required in acts of lasciviousness."35 Pursuant to Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code. the victim suffers moral injuries because the offender violates her chastity by his lewdness. four (4) months and one day of prision correccional. The lack of evidence showing his erectile penis being in the position to penetrate her when he was on top of her deterred any inference about his intent to lie with her. or that which is carried on a wanton manner. and (b) the act of lasciviousness or lewdness is committed either (i) by using force or intimidation. indecent. The Court also pointed out that the "act imputed to him cannot be considered a preparatory act to sexual intercourse. as the maximum. (3).32 In that regard. the moral damages of P20.1âwphi1 "Moral damages include physical suffering." and the intent to have sexual intercourse with her was not inferable from the act of licking her genitalia.00 and civil indemnity of P20. social humiliation. A good illustration of this can be seen in People v. the Court fixes the indeterminate sentence of three (3) months of arresto mayor. it signifies that form of immorality that has relation to moral impurity. therefore. prision correccional is imposed in its medium period. [he] did not perform all the acts of execution which would have produced the crime of Rape by reason of some causes other than his own spontaneous desistance.29 Attempted rape is committed.31 Based on Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code. or (ii) when the offended party is deprived ofreason or is otherwise unconscious. At most.28 If the acts of the petitioner did not constitute attempted rape. the courts are vested with the discretion to impose interest as a part of the damages in crimes and quasidelicts. The intent to commit rape should not easily be inferred against the petitioner. the petitioner."36 Indeed.000. a minor. four (4) months and one day of prision correccional. In the absence of modifying circumstances. lewdis defined as obscene. Bugarin. only the felony of acts of lasciviousness is committed. as the minimum. because by their equivocality no one could determine with certainty what the perpetrator’s intent really was. not attempted rape.00 to the complainant.