Trial Brief

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,
Rockwell Drive, Makati City

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
Email: inquiry@fraddlaw.com
_____________________________________________________________________________
FOR
Judge Maria Rowena Modesto-San Pedro

Internal Purposes
RE
Case: Rape
Client: Angel De Guzman
DATE
28 August 2016
TRIAL BRIEF
I.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
A. Summary of Facts
1. At around midnight of September 30, 2009, Angel De Guzman, then a
fourteen (14)-year old high school freshman student at Pasig Catholic
College, was sleeping in their living room downstairs as her parents
and siblings were sleeping upstairs. Living in a compound in Brgy.
Silangan, Pasig, with relatives as neighbors, her household did not
have the habit of locking their doors.
2. The accused, Philip Buendia, a seventeen (17)-year old distant
relative because his grandfather and Angels grandfather are
brothers, and neighbor of Angels family, entered their house through
the unlocked front door. Angel awoke at the sound of the screen door
being opened as she was sleeping on a couch right beside it. While it
was still dark at that time, Angel was able to recognize Philip due to
the light that came from a Sto. Nio statue in the living room, which
gave off sufficient illumination for Angel to recognize the familiar
features of Philip as he was a regular visitor in their house.
3. Still half-asleep, Angel was about to ask Philip what he wanted when,
without warning, Philip seized her and covered her mouth with one
hand while pressing something sharp to her throat with the other. He
then told her not to struggle or make any noise and showed her what
was pressed to her throat a knife.
4. Fearing for her life, Angel did not make any sudden movements but
began to shed tears. Philip, who was kneeling by the side of the
couch as he held the knife to her throat, then ordered her to take off
her shorts and panty. Terrified at what he might do with the knife if
she refused, Angel complied with Philips order and took off her
shorts and panty, leaving only her blouse on.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_
PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

Do not distribute externally unless expressly allowed by supervising partner.

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
5. Thereafter, Philip climbed on top of Angel and momentarily removed

the knife from her throat to do something with his shorts. He raised
her blouse to her abdomen and inserted something into her genitals,
causing her excruciating pain. Philip returned the knife to her throat
and began an up and down movement. This lasted for about a minute
or two when all Angel felt was fear, pain and anguish at what was
being done to her yet being powerless to stop it.
6. Finally finished with his dastardly act, Philip stopped and got up from
lying on top of her. He whispered a warning to her not to tell anyone
about what happened between them or else there would be trouble.
Only then did he leave the same way he came in. Ashamed and
remembering the warning, she did not tell anyone about the incident.
7. More than a month passed without incident. However, sometime in
mid-November, Angel awoke to the feeling of someone touching her
genitals. She then saw that Philip had again entered their living room
and was crouched by her side. Seeing that she had awaken, Philip
covered her mouth and ordered her to remove her clothes. Resigned
to her fate, she began to take off her shirt. As she was doing this,
Philip pulled down and removed her shorts and panty, all the while
without taking his other hand off her mouth, which he only removed
momentarily to completely take off her shirt.
8. Afterwards, Philip climbed on top of Angel and began fondling her
breasts with his free hand. Like before, she felt him insert something
in her private parts that caused her pain, although not as painful as
the first time. He made an up and down movement with his body and
removed his hand from her mouth to kiss her. After a while, Philip
stopped and got up and told her to put on her clothes. Before he left,
he again warned her not to tell anyone about the incident.
9. A third and final incident happened nearly two months later, or
sometime in January of 2010, when Angel was left alone in their
house as her family had taken an overnight trip to their province in
Nueva Ecija while she stayed behind because of an upcoming exam
the following day. At about 11:30 oclock in the evening, Philip came
to her house with his thirteen (13)-year old brother, Karl Buendia and
asked if they may come in for a chat, which was previously a regular
activity between the young neighbors.
10.
Thinking that she would be safe with Karl around, she invited
the brothers inside. Unfortunately, and much to her horror, as soon as
the brothers entered the house, Philip took hold of her, covered her
mouth, and pulled her to the floor. To stop her from struggling, Philip
hit her on the face with his fist then held her feet as Karl took off her
clothes.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_


Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
11.
As soon as Angels clothes were removed, Karl removed his
own clothes and climbed on top of her. She saw Karl insert his penis
in her vagina for more or less three minutes. Knowing that she was
alone at home and scared of getting hurt any further, Angel silently
took the abuse at the hands of the brothers. After the deed was done,
the brothers abruptly left after Karl put on her clothes, leaving her
crying on the floor.
12.
At around the time of the third incident, Angel had not been
feeling well and would often have bouts of nausea hit her at random
times of the day. Her breasts also felt swollen and tender, feeling sore
most of the time. Not aware of what was happening to her, Angel
figured that these were normal changes in her body and was
probably due to puberty, getting the idea from what she learned in
school.
13.
Sometime in February, she noticed that her belly was bigger
than how she last remembered it to be and was a bit disproportionate
from the rest of her body. Initially, she dismissed it as being caused
by her gaining weight as she recently had an increase in appetite.
14.
Soon, however, it became apparent that something other than
puberty was the cause of Angels symptoms. When her belly
continued to grow, she realized the possibility that she had become
pregnant. Not knowing what to do and afraid that shed be scolded,
Angel decided to conceal her pregnancy and started to wear loose
clothes at home.
15.
Not until Angels Father, Joseph De Guzman who had
previously left for his overseas work a little while after the third
incident on January returned home on May 28, 2010 did everything
come to a head. As he had not seen her daughter for more than three
(3) months, he immediately noticed that something was wrong.
16.
Fearing the worst, Joseph confronted his daughter that night
and asked her if shed been sleeping with someone. Angel was
initially reluctant to say anything, but after her father assured her that
he would not get angry, she finally revealed to him what had
transpired between her and Philip.
17.
Immediately after Angels revelation, Joseph brought her to the
Pasig City Police Station to report the crime to the proper authorities.
At the precinct, the officer-on-duty, Police Officer I (PO1) Ernesto
Magora, had Joseph assist Angel in executing her Sinumpaang
Salaysay wherein she narrated all that she remembered of the
incidents.
18.
As part of police procedure, Joseph accompanied Angel to the
Philippine National Police Crime Laboratory in Camp Crame, Quezon
City for a medico-legal examination. There, Police Chief Inspector
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_


Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
(PCI) Dean C. Cabrera, who received from the Pasig City Police
Station a Request for Genital Examination on Angel, asked Joseph to
accomplish a Sexual Protocol Crime form in addition to Angels
execution of a Manifestation of Consent to the physical and genital
examinations to be conducted upon her.
19.
After the examination, an Initial Medical-Legal Report was
issued to Joseph followed by a Final Medico-Legal Report. In his
report, PCI Cabrera confirmed that there was the presence of shallow
healed lacerations at 7 oclock position in Angels hymen, that she
was nine (9) months pregnant and that there was no external physical
injury on her.
B. Table of Witnesses (Table 1)
Name of
Witness
Description
Purpose of
Testimony
Gist of
Testimony
Angel De
Guzman
Offended Party
To establish the
circumstances
surrounding the
rape
Narrates the
individual
instances of rape
committed by
Philip and Karl
with particular
emphasis on the
facts that would
establish the
elements of the
felony
Joseph De
Guzman
Offended Partys
Father
To establish the
events following
the knowledge of
Angels rape;
relationship with
the accused as a
distant relative
He will testify as
to how the rape of
his daughter was
discovered and
what happened
after the
discovery. He will
also testify on
how their family
are related to the
offenders.
PO1 Ernesto
Officer in the
That the offended
He will testify as
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_


Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
Magora
Pasig City Police

Station
party went to the

police station and
that he processed
their report
to what occurred
in the Pasig City
Police Station on
the night that
Joseph and Angel
reported the rape
as well as affirm
the contents of
the affidavit he
executed after
Angel had told her
story
PCI Dean
Cabrera
Medico-Legal
expert from PNP
Crime Lab
To establish the
findings after
conducting the
physical and
genital
examination of
Angel
He will explain the

results of the
physical and
genital
examination that
he conducted as
shown by the
Medico-Legal
Report that he
prepared right
after. He will also
explain what the
report means
insofar as the
possibility that the
crime alleged was
committed.
C. Table of Evidence (Table 2)

Name &
Annex #
Description
Purpose
Summary of
Contents
Sinumpaang
Salaysay of Angel
De Guzman
(Annex A)
Sworn statement
executed in the
Pasig City Police
Station
Bolsters the
testimony of
Angel
Narrates the
events that
transpired leading
up to Angels rape
at the hands of
Philip and Karl
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_


Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
Affidavit of PO1
Magora
Affidavit executed
by PO1 Magora
on the day that
the rape was
reported
To establish the
surrounding
circumstances at
the time Joseph
and Angel went to
the Pasig City
Police Station
Narrates what
happened when
Joseph and Angel
went to the Police
Station and tells
the story as told
by Angel to PO1
Magora
Laboratory
Request for
Genital
Examination
Request form
prepared by PO1
Magora
addressed to the
PNP Crime
Laboratory
To show that the

proper process
was followed by
the police
authorities
Short letter
requesting the
PNP Crime
Laboratory to
conduct an
examination of
Angels genitals in
relation to an
investigation of an
alleged rape
Document
accomplished by
Joseph at the
PNP Crime
Laboratory
To show that the

proper process
was followed by
the police
authorities in the
conduct of the
investigation
Alleges the fact

that a crime has
been committed
and names Philip
and Karl Buendia
as the
perpetrators
thereof
Document
accomplished by
Angel giving
consent to
undergo physical
examination of
her person
To show that the

proper process
was followed by
the police
authorities in the
conduct of the
investigation
The letter gives

consent to the
proper officer of
the PNP Crime
Laboratory to
have herself
undergo a
physical
examination,
including her
genitals
Report prepared
by PCI Cabrera
after conducting
To establish the
results of the
examination of
Shows the results

of the physical
and genital
(Annex B)
Sexual Protocol
Crime Form
(Annex C)
Manifestation of
Consent
(Annex D)
Medico-Legal
Report
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_


Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
(Annex E)
II.
the examination
of Angel
Angels person
examination of
Angel, including
the determination
of her pregnancy,
its status, and the
physical condition
of her genitals
STATEMENT OF ISSUES
A. Issues
1. Whether or not rape has been committed on Sept. 30, 2009?
2. Whether or not rape has been committed on or about November
2009?
3. Whether or not rape has been committed on or about January 2010?
4. Whether or not conspiracy existed in the third incident?
5. Whether unlawful entry in the dwelling existed in all three incidents?
6. Whether or not all three rape incidents can be prosecuted?
a) Whether discernment existed in the relevant incidents?
B. Clients Positions (Complainant)
1. There was rape committed on all three occasions irrespective the
presence of protest from our client, because it was clearly done
against her will.
2. In the third rape incident, there was conspiracy since both Philip and
Karl acted with unity in criminal intent and purpose.
3. There was unlawful entry in the dwelling since it is a complete
disregard to its sanctity.
4. All three instances can be prosecuted
a. Philip clearly acted with discernment in the first instance.
b. In the second instance, Philip is already 18 years old.
c. As to the third instance, there is unity in criminal intent.
C. Possible Positions of Adverse Party
1. Philip did not act with discernment.
2. Philip is not yet 18 years old at the time of the commission of the rape
in the second instance.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_


Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
3. The entry to the dwelling is not unlawful since he is always welcome

to come in.
4. Karl and Angel were sweethearts. They had a consensual sexual
relationship.
D. Possible Questions to Complainants Witnesses
Witness
General Questions
for Witness
Possible Objections
from Defense
Angel De Guzman
Q1: How do you know

the accused?
The witness is biased

and cannot give a fair
and objective answer.
Q2: Why did you not call

out for help?
Q3: Why did you let both
the brothers inside if you
were afraid of Philip?
Q4: Where do you go to
school?
Joseph De Guzman
Q1: Do you remember

This witness is biased.
where were you between
the months of January
and May?
Q2: Why were you
overseas?
Q3: When did you come
back to the Philippines?
Q4: What did you notice
after returning home?
PO1 Magora
Q1: What is your

position?
Q2: Have you seen the
offended party and her
father before? Where?
The credibility of this

witness is highly
questionable.
Q3: What did you do

________________________________________________________________________________________________
_


Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
after hearing their

complaint?
Q4: What documents, if
any, did you prepare in
relation to processing
their complaint?
PCI Cabrera
Q1: What is your

position in the PNP
Crime Laboratory?
This witness is hardly

credible.
Q2: Do you often

conduct physical
examinations?
Q3: Do you recognize
your signature on the
Medico-Legal Report
issued to the offended
party?
Q4: Can you explain its
contents?
III.
LAW OF THE CASE

A. Laws
1. Crime of Rape
Article 266-A. Rape: When And How Committed. Rape is committed:
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a
woman under any of the following circumstances:
a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious;
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse
of authority; and
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years
of age or is demented, even though none of the
circumstances mentioned above be present.
2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances
mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act
of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another
person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_


Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
object, into the genital or anal orifice of another

person.1
2. Penalty for Rape

Article 266-B. Penalty. - Rape under paragraph 1 of
the next preceding article shall be punished by
reclusion perpetua.
Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a
deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the
penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.2
Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances. The following

are aggravating circumstances:
xxx
3. That the act be committed with insult or in disregard
of the respect due the offended party on account of
his rank, age, or sex, or that is be committed in the
dwelling of the offended party, if the latter has not
given provocation.3
Art. 63. Rules for the application of indivisible
penalties. xxx In all cases in which the law
prescribes a penalty composed of two indivisible
penalties, the following rules shall be observed in the
application thereof:
1. When in the commission
of the deed there is present only one
aggravating circumstance, the greater penalty
shall be applied.4
3. Conspiracy
ARTICLE 8. Conspiracy and Proposal to Commit
Felony. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony
are punishable only in the cases in which the law
specially provides a penalty therefor.
1 An Act Revising the Penal Code and Other Penal Laws [R P C], Act No. 3815,
art. 266-A, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353 (1932).
2 Id. art. 266-B.

3 Id. art. 14(3).
4 Id. art. 63.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

10

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons

come to an agreement concerning the
commission of a felony and decide to commit it.
There is proposal when the person who has decided
to commit a felony proposes its execution to some
other person or persons.5
4. Liability of Accused
SEC. 6. Minimum Age of Criminal Responsibility. A
child fifteen (15) years of age or under at the time
of the commission of the offense shall be exempt
from criminal liability. However, the child shall be
subjected to an intervention program pursuant to
Section 20 of this Act.
A child is deemed to be fifteen (15) years of age on the
day of the fifteenth anniversary of his/her birthdate.
A child above fifteen (15) years but below eighteen
(18) years of age shall likewise be exempt from
criminal liability and be subjected to an
intervention program, unless he/she has acted
with discernment, in which case, such child shall
be subjected to the appropriate proceedings in
accordance with this Act.
The exemption from criminal liability herein established
does not include exemption from civil liability, which
shall be enforced in accordance with existing laws. 6
SEC. 20-A. Serious Crimes Committed by Children

Who Are Exempt From Criminal Responsibility. A
child who is above twelve (12) years of age up to
fifteen (15) years of age and who commits
parricide, murder, infanticide, kidnapping and serious
illegal detention where the victim is killed or raped,
robbery, with homicide or rape, destructive arson,
rape, or carnapping where the driver or occupant is
killed or raped or offenses under Republic Act No.
9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002)
punishable by more than twelve (12) years of
imprisonment, shall be deemed a neglected child
under Presidential Decree No. 603, as amended, and
shall be mandatorily placed in a special facility
5 Id. art 8.
6 An Act Establishing A Comprehensive Juvenile Justice And Welfare System, Creating The
Juvenile Justice And Welfare Council Under The Department Of Justice, Appropriating Funds
Therefor And For Other Purposes [Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006], Republic Act No.
9344, 6, as amended by Republic Act No. 10630 (2005).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

11

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
within the youth care faculty or Bahay Pag-asa

called the Intensive Juvenile Intervention and
Support Center (IJISC).7
B. Jurisprudence
1. Elements of Rape
For a charge of rape to prosper under Article 266-A of
the Revised Penal Code, as amended, the
prosecution must prove that (1) the offender had
carnal knowledge of a woman; and (2) he
accompanied such act through force, threat, or
intimidation, or when she was deprived of reason or
otherwise unconscious, or when she was under
twelve years of age or was demented. 8
First Element: Carnal Knowledge

Existing rulings on rape do not require complete or full
penetration of the victims private organ. Neither is the
rupture of the hymen necessary. The mere
introduction of the penis into the labia majora of the
victims genitalia engenders the crime of rape. Hence,
it is the touching or entry of the penis into the labia
majora or the labia minora of the pudendum of the
victims genitalia that consummates rape. Penile
invasion necessarily entails contact with the labia.
Even the briefest of contacts, without laceration of the
hymen, is deemed to be rape.9
Second Element: Force, Threat and Intimidation

Force
lt is not necessary that the force employed against the
complaining woman in rape be so great or of such a
character as could not be resisted It is sufficient that
the force used is sufficient to consummate the culprit
s purpose of copulating with the offended woman The
force or violence necessary in rape is naturally a
relative term, depending on the age, size and strength
of the parties and their relation to each other.10
7 Id. 20-A.
8 People v. Caada, 602 SCRA 378, 388 (2009).
9 People v. Basquez, 366 SCRA 154, 168-69 (2001).
10 People vs. Savellano, 57 SCRA 320, 328 (1974).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

12

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
Intimidation
The proposition that private complainant consented to
appellants sexual advances, negating force and
intimidation, is too trite to be seriously considered.
That there was force and intimidation was clear from
the testimony of private complainant. There was force
when appellant pressed Emelyn to the floor despite
her plea of Huwag po. There was intimidation when
he threatened to kill her if she shouted. Intimidation
must be viewed in light of the victims perception and
judgment at the time of rape and not by any hard and
fast rule. It is enough that it produces fear that if the
victim does not yield to the bestial demands of the
accused, something would happen to her at the
moment or thereafter, as when she is threatened with
death if she reports the incident.11
Threat
The test is whether the threat or intimidation produces
a reasonable fear in the mind of the victim that if she
resists or does not yield to the desires of the accused,
the threat would be carried out. Where resistance
would be futile, offering none at all does not amount
to consent to the sexual assault. It is not necessary
that the victim should have resisted unto death or
sustained physical injuries in the hands of the rapist. It
is enough if the intercourse takes place against her
will or if she yields because of genuine apprehension
of harm to her if she did not do so. Indeed, the law
does not impose upon a rape victim the burden of
proving resistance.12
Physical Resistance Need Not Be Established

Physical resistance need not be established in rape
when threats and intimidation are employed, and the
victim submits herself to her attacker because of fear.
Failure to shout or offer tenacious resistance does not
make voluntary the victims submission to the
perpetrators lust. Besides, physical resistance is not
the sole test to determine whether a woman
involuntarily succumbed to the lust of an accused; it is
not an essential element of rape.13
Use of knife
11 People vs. Metin, GR No. 140781 (2003).
12 People vs. Las Pinas, GR No. 133444 (2002).
13 People vs. Penilla, GR. No. 189324 (2013).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

13

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
We are convinced that the act complained of was

committed through force and intimidation and with
the use of a knife, as testified to by the complainant
and affirmed by the trial court. The testimony of the
complainant is corroborated by other witnesses and
by medical findings. We find nothing disparate or
improbable in said testimony. The Court is convinced
of the sincerity of the complainant who had no reason
to falsely incriminate the appellant Considering the
inbred modesty and antipathy of a Filipino woman to
air in public things that affect her honor, it is hard to
conceive that the complainant would assume and
admit the ignominy she had undergone if this were
not true.14
2. Presence of Conspiracy
Conspiracy in Rape Cases
1. Conspiracy exists when
the acts of the accused demonstrate a
common design towards the accomplishment
of the same unlawful purpose. In the present
case, the acts of Dela Torre, Bisaya, and
Amoroso clearly indicate a unity of action: (1)
Dela Torre called AAA and brought her inside
the jeep; (2) Bisaya and Amoroso were waiting
inside the jeep; (3) Dela Torre kissed and
touched AAA while Bisaya and Amoroso
watched; (4) Dela Torre passed AAA to Bisaya;
(5) Bisaya kissed and touched AAA while Dela
Torre and Amoroso watched; (6) Bisaya
passed AAA to Amoroso; and (7) Amoroso
inserted his penis in AAAs vagina and kissed
her while Dela Torre and Bisaya watched.
Since there was conspiracy among Dela Torre,
Bisaya, and Amoroso, the act of any one was
the act of all and each of them is equally guilty
of all the crimes committed.15
2. We agree with the CA that
the appellant and Kino conspired in sexually
assaulting AAA. In the present case, the acts of
Kino and of the appellant clearly indicate a
unity of action: (1) Kino and the appellant
entered the victims house at around 9:00 p.m.;
(2) Kino and the appellant ordered the victim to
14 People vs. Mustacisa, 159 SCRA 227, 233 (1988).
15 People vs. Dela Torre, 567 SCRA 651, 657 (2008).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

14

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
lie down, and threatened to kill her if she

refused to do so; (3) Kino undressed AAA,
while the appellant tied her hands; (4) the
appellant held AAAs feet, while Kino inserted
his penis into the victims private parts; and (5)
the appellant raped AAA afterwards. Clearly,
the appellant and Kino performed specific acts
with such closeness and coordination as to
indicate an unmistakably common purpose or
design to commit the felony. Thus, they are
liable for two (2) counts of rape on account
of a clear conspiracy between them, shown
by their obvious concerted efforts to
perpetrate, one after the other, the rapes.
Each of them is responsible not only for the
rape committed personally by him but also
for the rape committed by the other as
well.16
Liability of each of the accused for every act of rape

committed by the other.
Carampatana, Oporto, and Alquizola can then be held
liable for more than one crime of rape, or a total of
four (4) counts in all, with conspiracy extant among
the three of them during the commission of each of
the four violations. Each of the accused shall thus be
held liable for every act of rape committed by the
other.17
3. Accused Acted with Discernment

In determining if such a minor acted with discernment,
the Courts pronouncement in Valentin v. Duquea is
instructive: The discernment that constitutes an
exception to the exemption from criminal liability
of a minor under fifteen years of age but over nine,
who commits an act prohibited by law, is his mental
capacity to understand the difference between
right and wrong, and such capacity may be known
and should be determined by taking into
consideration all the facts and circumstances
afforded by the records in each case, the very
appearance, the very attitude, the very
comportment and behavior of said minor, not only
16 People vs. Delabajan, 668 SCRA 859, 865 (2012).
17 People vs. CA, 751 SCRA 675, 715 (2015).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

15

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
before and during the commission of the act, but

also after and even during the trial.
In this case, the evidence on record shows beyond
cavil that the appellants acted with discernment when
they raped the victim, thus: (a) they wetted the
victims vagina before they raped her; (b) one of them
acted as a lookout while the other was raping the
victim; (c) they threatened to kill the victim if she
divulged to her parents what they did to her; (d) they
forced Boyet to rape the victim; (e) they laughed as
Boyet was raping the victim; (f) they ordered Leah
Lou and Lionel to look at their sister naked after the
appellants had raped her.18
4. Testimony of Victim is Credible

General Principles in Deciding Rape Cases
In determining the guilt or innocence of the accused in
rape cases, the Court is guided by three wellentrenched principles:
(1) an accusation of rape can be made with facility and
while the accusation is difficult to prove, it is even more
difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to
disprove the charge;
(2) considering that, in the nature of things, only two
persons are usually involved in the crime of rape, the
testimony of the complainant should be scrutinized
with great caution; and
(3) the evidence of the prosecution must stand or fall
on its own merit, and cannot be allowed to draw
strength from the weakness of the evidence for the
defense.19
Lone Testimony of Victim is Sufficient to Sustain Conviction

It is a rule that the lone testimony of the victim in the
prosecution for rape, if credible, is sufficient to sustain
a verdict of conviction. The testimony of a victim,
whose chastity has not been questioned, is generally
accorded credence because such offended party
would not have fabricated facts that could bring
shame and dishonor on her. Nor would she disclose
18 People vs. Cortezano, 411 SCRA 431, 452 (2003).
19 People v. Ramos, 554 SCRA 423, 430 (2008).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

16

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
her humiliating experience at a public trial, and thus

give rise to gossip and slander, unless her motive was
to bring to justice the person who grievously wronged
her.20
Corroboration of Victims Testimony is Not Necessary

In cases involving the prosecution for forcible rape,
the courts have consistently held that, as a general
rule, corroboration of the victims testimony is not a
necessary condition to a conviction for rape where the
victims testimony is credible, or clear and convincing
or sufficient to prove the elements of the offense
beyond a reasonable doubt. The weight and
sufficiency of evidence are determined by the
credibility, nature, and quality of the testimony.21
Willingness and courage to face the interrogation and medical

examination is proof of the truth
AAA, a fourteen-year old girl, was raped by three
men inside her mothers sari-sari store. We are not
dealing here with a worldly-wise woman who could
fabricate an elaborate scheme to destroy the life and
reputation of appellant for no reason at all, but a 14year old girl barely out of her adolescent years.
Considering her naivet and her tender age, it would
be difficult to believe that her rape charge is a
prevaricated concoction.
We have repeatedly stressed that no woman in her
right mind would be willing to make public her being a
rape victim and risk the ordeal of interrogation, were it
not for the purpose of vindicating her honor. [AAAs]
willingness and courage to face the interrogation and
medical examination is a mute but eloquent proof of
the truth of her charge.22
C. Possible Arguments of Respondent

DELAY IN REPORTING THE INCIDENT
Respondent:
20 People vs. Lor, et al., G.R. Nos. L-47440-42 (1984).
21 People vs. Malate, 588 SCRA 817, 825 (2009).
22 People v. Joya, et al., G.R. No. 79090 (1993).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

17

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
PEOPLE v. FLORES23
Edna Flores was fourteen years old when appellant, Cirilo
Flores, allegedly raped her.24 Initially, Edna did not report the incident
out of fear that Cirilo would kill her.25 Edna, however, became
pregnant and later on gave birth to a baby girl, compelling her to
reveal the situation to her father.26 A criminal case thus ensued and
the lower court found Cirilo guilty of rape. 27 He was sentenced to
serve life imprisonment.28
On appeal, the Supreme Court acquitted Cirilo on the ground
that Ednas silence for eight and a half months, the same period of
time that Edna was carrying her child with Cirilo, rendered doubtful
the truth of Ednas charge.29 The Supreme Court held that the
contention of Edna of asserting that being only fourteen years old at
the time of the commission of the offense and her incapability to
make false statements against her abuser at such tender age would
have been true two generations ago. 30 However, such justification
does not apply anymore these days, especially when teenagers are
sex-conscious, outgoing, frank and aggressive.31
Counter-Argument:
PEOPLE v. AUDINE32
The case of Audine decided in 2006, a more recent case than
Flores ruled that:
Also, the delay in reporting the rape only showed that not all
rape victims can be expected to act in the same way.33 Joses
imputation of ill motive or revenge on the part of AAA after Jose had
forced AAA to separate with her boyfriend was not sufficient to sway
the court.34 It is highly improbable that a minor girl, one not yet
23 People v. Flores, 129 SCRA 244(1983).

24 Id, at 246.
25 Id.
26 Id.
27 Id.
28 Id.
29 Id, at 248.
30 Id.
31 Id.
32 People v. Audine, 510 SCRA 531(2006).
33 Id, at 549.
34 Id.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

18

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
exposed to the ways of the world, would impute to any man a crime
so serious as rape if what she claims is not true.35
SWEETHEART THEORY
Counter-Argument:
PEOPLE v. PATRIARCA36
Patriarca was criminally charged for raping Jihan. 37 Among his
defenses, he claims that he and Jihan were sweethearts and that, at
the time in question, Jihan invited him to her friends bedroom where
she professed her love for him, thus leading to the sexual
intercourse.38 Still, the RTC found him guilty.39
In affirming Patriarcas conviction, the Supreme Court rejected
Patriarcas sweetheart theory holding that Jihan, a young girl from a
decent family is not capable of seducing a man like Patriarca. Also,
there was no showing that Jihan was a woman of loose morals
whose characteristic Filipina modesty was absent. Finally, the Court
said that a rape victim would not publicly disclose that she had been
raped and undergo the humiliation of trial if her motive was other than
justice and retribution. More specifically, it would be unbecoming a
young Filipina to publicly admit that she had been criminally abused
and ravished unless such is the truth, for it is her natural instinct to
protect her honor.40
PEOPLE v. SONIDO
The sweetheart theory proffered by the appellant hardly
deserves attention. The Court has constantly ruled that a love affair
does not justify rape, for the beloved cannot be sexually violated
against her will. A sweetheart cannot be forced to have sex against
her willlove is not a license for lust.41
MINIMUM AGE OF CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY
35 Id.
36 People v. Rolando Patriarca, 319 SCRA 87(1999).
37 Id, at 90.
38 Id, at 94.
39 Id, at 90.
40 Id, at 98.
41 People v. Sonido, 433 SCRA 701, 715(2004).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

19

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
Respondent:
R.A. No. 10630
Sec. 6. Minimum Age of Criminal responsibility.
xxx
A child above fifteen (15) years but below eighteen (18) years of age
shall likewise be exempt from criminal liability and be subjected to an
intervention program, unless he/she has acted with discernment, in
which case, such child shall be subjected to the appropriate
proceedings in accordance with this Act.
Xxx42
Counter-Argument:
Claiming an exemption presupposes admission of guilt.
SIERRA V. PEOPLE43
An exempting circumstance, by its nature, admits that criminal
and civil liabilities exist, but the accused is freed from criminal liability;
in other words, the accused committed a crime, but he cannot be held
criminally liable therefor because of an exemption granted by law. 44
The burden of evidence has now shifted to the
defense which now claims, by an affirmative defense,
that the accused, even if guilty, should be exempt
from criminal liability because of his age when he
committed the crime. The defense, therefore, not the
prosecution, has the burden of showing by evidence
that the petitioner was 15 years old or less when he
committed the rape charged. This conclusion can also
be reached by considering that minority and age are
not elements of the crime of rape; the prosecution
therefore has no duty to prove these circumstances.
To impose the burden of proof on the prosecution
would make minority and age integral elements of the
crime when clearly they are not. If the prosecution has
a burden related to age, this burden relates to proof of
the age of the victim as a circumstance that qualifies
the crime of rape.45
42 An Act strengthening the juvenile justice system in the Philippines, amending for the purpose
Republic Act No. 9334, otherwise known as the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 and
appropriating funds therefor, Republic Act No. 10630, 6(2012).
43 Sierra v. People, 519 CRA 666,(2006)
44 Id, at 680.
45 Id, at 669.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

20

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
DENIAL OF DNA TEST AS TO THE CHILD

Counter-Argument:
PEOPLE v. PENASO46
Appellant insists that he did not get private
complainant pregnant. He cites the testimony of
defense witness Rafael Libres, a classmate of the
victim, to the effect that complainant admitted to him
that appellant had not caused her pregnancy.
According to Libres, complainant identified either one
Willy Guitano or a certain man from Sagumay,
Candijay, Bohol as the possible father of her child.
Appellant also points an accusing finger at private
complainants stepfather as a possible culprit. This
attempt to impugn the victims moral character by the
appellant is self-serving and unsupported by the
evidence. Furthermore, the question of who sired the
victims child has no bearing here, for in rape cases,
the identity of the father of the victims child is not an
issue, pregnancy not being an element of the crime. 47
IN RE: THE WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS FOR REYNALDO DE

VILLA48
It must be stressed that the issue of Leahlyn
Mendozas paternity is not central to the issue of
petitioners guilt or innocence. The rape of the victim
Aileen Mendoza is an entirely different question,
separate and distinct from the question of the father
of her child. Recently, in the case of People v.
Alberio, we ruled that the fact or not of the victims
pregnancy and resultant childbirth are irrelevant in
determining whether or not she was raped.
Pregnancy is not an essential element of the crime of
rape. Whether the child which the victim bore was
fathered by the purported rapist, or by some
unknown individual, is of no moment in determining
an individuals guilt.49
NO RESISTANCE ON THE PART OF THE PLAINTIFF

Counter-Argument:
46 People v. Penaso, 326 SCRA 311(2000).
47 Id, at 321.
48 In re: the writ of habeas corpus for Reynaldo De Villa, 442 SCRA 706(2004).
49 Id, at 726.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

21

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
PEOPLE v. LIWANAG50
The workings of a human mind placed under
emotional stress are unpredictable and people react
differentlysome may shout, some may faint, and
some may be shocked into insensibility while others
may openly welcome the intrusion. In any case, the
law does not impose upon a rape victim the burden of
proving resistance. Physical resistance need not be
established in rape when intimidation is exercised
upon the victim and she submits herself against her
will to the rapists lust because of fear for life and
personal safety.51
PEOPLE v. SONIDO52
Proof of external injuries is not indispensable in
a prosecution for rape committed with force or
violence. Proof of injury is not an element of rape. The
resistance on the part of the victim need not be
carried to the point of inviting death or sustaining
physical injuries at the hand of the rapist. It suffices
that the coitus takes place against her will, or that she
yields because of genuine apprehension of great
harm.53
ACCUSED ACTED WITHOUT DISCERNMENT

Counter-Argument:
PEOPLE v. CORTEZANO54
In determining if such a minor acted with
discernment, the Courts pronouncement in Valentin
v. Duqueais instructive: The discernment that
constitutes an exception to the exemption from
criminal liability of a minor under fifteen years of age
but over nine, who commits an act prohibited by law,
is his mental capacity to understand the difference
between right and wrong, and such capacity may be
known and should be determined by taking into
consideration all the facts and circumstances afforded
by the records in each case, the very appearance, the
very attitude, the very comportment and behavior of
said minor, not only before and during the commission
50 People v. Liwanag, 363 SCRA 62(2001)
51 Id, at 85.
52 Sonido, 433 SCRA at 714.
53 Id, at 714.
54 People v. Cortezano, 411 SCRA 431(2003).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

22

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
of the act, but also after and even during the trial. In
this case, the evidence on record shows beyond cavil
that the appellants acted with discernment when they
raped the victim, thus: (a) they wetted the victims
vagina before they raped her; (b) one of them acted
as a lookout while the other was raping the victim; (c)
they threatened to kill the victim if she divulged to her
parents what they did to her; (d) they forced Boyet to
rape the victim; (e) they laughed as Boyet was raping
the victim; (f) they ordered Leah Lou and Lionel to
look at their sister naked after the appellants had
raped her.55
IV.
THEORY OF THE CASE

PHILIP AND KARL COMMITTED THE CRIME OF RAPE.
A. Philip is liable for three (3) counts of rape, while Karl is liable for one
(1) count of rape, as defined in Article 266-A. All three counts can be
prosecuted in light of the following circumstances:
1. In the first, Philip clearly acted with discernment.
2. In the second, Philip was already 18 years old.
3. In the third, there was unity in the criminal intent of both the accused.
B. Angel, the fourteen year-old victim, narrated in her sinumpaang
salaysay her recollection of the incidents and confirmed the twos
culpability in the rape. The testimony, along with Angels willingness
to participate in the police procedure, sexual crime protocols, and
examination, is persuasive and sufficient to convict Philip and Karl.
1. When credible, the victims sole testimony in the prosecution for rape
is sufficient to sustain conviction. The testimony of a victim, whose
chastity has not been questioned, is generally accorded credence
because such offended party would not have fabricated facts nor
would she disclose her humiliating experience at a public trial. 56
2. For forcible rape, the courts have stated that corroboration of the
victims testimony is not a necessary condition to a conviction for rape
where the victims testimony is credible, or clear and convincing or
sufficient to prove the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable
doubt. The weight and sufficiency of evidence are determined by the
credibility, nature, and quality of the testimony.57
3. In People v. Joya, AAA, a fourteen-year old girl, was raped by three
men inside her mothers sari-sari store. The court stressed here that
no woman in her right mind would be willing to make public her being
55 Id, at 452.
56 People vs. Lor, et al., G.R. Nos. L-47440-42 (1984).
57 People vs. Malate, 588 SCRA 817, 825 (2009).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

23

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
a rape victim and risk the ordeal of interrogation, were it not for the
purpose of vindicating her honor. The victims willingness and
courage to face the interrogation and medical examination is a mute
but eloquent proof of the truth of her charge. 58
C. Philip committed three counts of rape: two counts of rape as
principal as contemplated in Article 266-A and one count as
principal by conspiracy:
1. Under paragraph 1 of Article 266-A, rape is committed:
a. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under
any of the following circumstances:
Through force, threat, or intimidation;
When the
offended party is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious;
By means
of fraudulent machination or grave
abuse of authority; and
When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is
demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above
be present.
2. Philip committed two counts of rape through force, threat, or
intimidation occurring on two separate occasions in 2009.
3. First count: he committed first count of rape at around midnight of
September 30, 2009. In this count, Philip seized Angel and covered
her mouth with one hand while pressing something sharp to her
throat with the other. He then told her not to struggle or make any
noise and showed her what was pressed to her throat a knife. Philip
proceeded to rape the helpless victim by inserting her penis into her
vagina. After finishing the dastardly act, he intimidated the same and
threatened her not to tell anyone about the incident.
4. Second count: he committed the second count of rape sometime in
mid-November of 2009. Angel awoke to the feeling of someone
touching her genitals and saw Philip. He proceeded to cover her
mouth and ordered her to remove her clothes, which she followed,
feeling resigned; Philip then removed her clothing from the waist
down. Afterwards, Philip climbed on top of the victim, fondled her
breasts, and thrusted her penis into her vagina. After the incident, he
again warned her not to tell anyone about the incident.
5. Third count as principal by conspiracy: he committed the third, as
conspirator, through his and Karls concerted efforts in letting Karl
rape Angel. Sometime in January of 2010, Philip came to her house
58 People v. Joya, et al., G.R. No. 79090 (1993).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

24

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
with his thirteen year-old brother, Karl Buendia and helped Karl rape
the victim.
a. Philip participated in the rape by covering her mouth, restraining her
on the floor, and hitting her on the face with his fist to stop her from
struggling. Philip held her down as Karl inserted his penis in her
vagina, allowing him to finish the heinous act.
6. Under Article 8 of the RPC, a conspiracy exists when two or more
persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a
felony and decide to commit it. Conspiracy in rape cases have been
acknowledged in jurisprudence:
a. In People v. Delabajan: A conspiracy exists when the accused
performed specific acts with such closeness and coordination as to
indicate an unmistakably common purpose or design to commit the
felony. They are liable for the counts of rape committed through a
clear conspiracy between them, shown by their obvious concerted
efforts to perpetrate, one after the other, the rapes. Each of the
accused shall thus be held liable for every act of rape committed by
the other.59
C. Karl, a thirteen year-old acting with discernment, committed one
count of rape as contemplated in Article 266-A, notwithstanding his
age during the commission of the crime.
1. Karl took off Angels clothes then raped the victim through the help of
his brother Philip, who was restraining her as Karl committed the act.
There was conspiracy since both Philip and Karl acted with unity in
criminal intent and purpose.
2. Both Philip and Karl exhibited discernment as persuasively laid out in
Valentin v. Duquea:
a. The discernment that constitutes an exception to the exemption
from criminal liability of a minor under fifteen years of age but over
nine is his mental capacity to understand the difference between
right and wrong. Such capacity may be known and should be
determined by taking into consideration all the facts and
circumstances afforded by the records in each case, the very
appearance, the very attitude, the very comportment and
behavior of said minor, not only before and during the
commission of the act, but also after and even during the trial.
3. According to RA 10630, a child who commits serious crimes, such as
rape, and is above twelve (12) years of age and up to fifteen (15)
years of age shall be deemed a neglected child under Presidential
Decree No. 603, as amended, and shall be mandatorily placed in a
59 People vs. CA, 751 SCRA 675, 715 (2015).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

25

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
special facility within the youth care faculty or Bahay Pag-asa called
the Intensive Juvenile Intervention and Support Center (IJISC). 60
Table of Authorities
Laws
An Act Revising the Penal Code and Other Penal Laws [REVISED
PENAL CODE], Act No. 3815, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353
(1932).
An Act Establishing A Comprehensive Juvenile Justice And Welfare
System, Creating The Juvenile Justice And Welfare Council Under
The Department Of Justice, Appropriating Funds Therefor And For
Other Purposes [Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006], Republic
Act No. 9344, as amended by Republic Act No. 10630 (2005).
An Act strengthening the juvenile justice system in the Philippines,
amending for the purpose Republic Act No. 9334, otherwise known
as the Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006 and appropriating
funds therefor, Republic Act No. 10630, 6(2012).
Cases
People v. Caada, 602 SCRA 378 (2009).
People v. Basquez, 366 SCRA 154 (2001).
People vs. Savellano, 57 SCRA 320 (1974).
People vs. Metin, GR No. 140781 (2003).
People vs. Las Pinas, GR No. 133444 (2002).
People vs. Penilla, GR. No. 189324 (2013).
People vs. Mustacisa, 159 SCRA 227, 233 (1988).
People vs. Dela Torre, 567 SCRA 651 (2008).
People vs. Delabajan, 668 SCRA 859 (2012).
People vs. CA, 751 SCRA 675 (2015).
People vs. Cortezano, 411 SCRA 431, 452 (2003).
People v. Ramos, 554 SCRA 423, 430 (2008).
People vs. Lor, et al., G.R. Nos. L-47440-42 (1984).
People vs. Malate, 588 SCRA 817 (2009).
People v. Joya, et al., G.R. No. 79090 (1993).
People v. Flores, 129 SCRA 244(1983).
60 Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006, 20-A.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

26

Phone: (+63 2)899 7691
Fax: (+63 2) 729 6609
_____________________________________________________________________________
People v. Audine, 510 SCRA 531 (2006).

People v. Rolando Patriarca, 319 SCRA 87(1999).
People v. Sonido, 433 SCRA 701, 715(2004).
Sierra v. People, 519 SCRA 666 (2006)
People v. Penaso, 326 SCRA 311(2000).
In re: the writ of habeas corpus for Reynaldo De Villa, 442 SCRA 706
(2004).
People v. Liwanag, 363 SCRA 62(2001)
People v. Cortezano, 411 SCRA 431(2003).
People vs. Malate, 588 SCRA 817, 825 (2009).
________________________________________________________________________________________________
_

27

Trial Brief

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Trial Brief

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

Rockwell Drive, Makati City

Judge Maria Rowena Modesto-San Pedro

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

5. Thereafter, Philip climbed on top of Angel and momentarily removed

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

That the offended

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

Pasig City Police

party went to the

He will explain the

C. Table of Evidence (Table 2)

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

To show that the

To show that the

Alleges the fact

To show that the

The letter gives

Shows the results

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

3. The entry to the dwelling is not unlawful since he is always welcome

Q1: How do you know

The witness is biased

Q2: Why did you not call

Q1: Do you remember

Q1: What is your

The credibility of this

Q3: What did you do

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

after hearing their

Q1: What is your

This witness is hardly

Q2: Do you often

LAW OF THE CASE

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

object, into the genital or anal orifice of another

2. Penalty for Rape

Art. 14. Aggravating circumstances. The following

2 Id. art. 266-B.

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

A conspiracy exists when two or more persons

SEC. 20-A. Serious Crimes Committed by Children

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

within the youth care faculty or Bahay Pag-asa

First Element: Carnal Knowledge

Second Element: Force, Threat and Intimidation

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,

Physical Resistance Need Not Be Established

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

10th Floor, 8 Rockwell Center,