This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Diana Relationship must be alleged for murder to become PARRICIDE FACTS: 1. On January 1974, Rodolfo Magnaye married PresentacionJumawan (1 of the accused) 2. They separated. Each left the conjugal abode. 3. Presentacion s mother tried (a lot of times) to get Rodolfo to sign an agreement that would let each of them remarry but failed 4. On June 19, 1976, Rodolfo went to meet Presentacion at the Sariaya public market to talk about their lives 5. The meeting turned out to be their last one because he was killed at that day. 6. According to a witness, Rodolfo was killed inside a store at the public market by Presentacion, her 2 brothers, and her father. At Presentacion s order he was stabbed to death by one of the brother while the other brother and father were preventing him from moving. 7. The next day, Rodolfo s mother, who was looking for him, found his dead body by the waters. 8. The trial court found the 4 accused guilty of the crime of murder under Art 248 of the RPC ISSUE: Since Presentacion is the victim s wife, should she be held guilty for parricide instead? HELD: No. She stands convicted of MURDER. - For her to be guilty of parricide, her relationship to the deceased should have been alleged in the information. - However, the aggravating circumstance of relationship may still be assigned against the other accused. But, their penalty has been reduced to reclusion perpetua for lack in number of votes. *Their alibis are not credible because the places where they said they were at the time of the crime are not that far from the scene of the crime. DECISION: Judgment Affirmed
PEOPLE VS TOMOTORGO BEL FACTS: 1. Accused Jaime Tomotorgo y Alarcon is married to Magdalena de los Santos. 2. Magdalena persistently asked the accused to sell their conjugal home located in SitioDinalungan Barangay Cabugai Cam Sur. She also asked him that they transfer to the house of her husband s in-law which is located in the town of Tinamabac. 3. The accused refused to abide by her wife s request because he does not like to abandon theri home and he has many plants and improvements on the land which he farms. 4. On June 23, 1977, at 7 am, the accused left home to go to farm and upon return at 9 am he found his wife and three-month old baby already gone 5. He proceeded to look for them and on a trail of about 200 meters from their home, he saw his wife with the infants together with a bundle of clothes. 6. He asked and pleaded for their return but she adamantly refused to do so 7. When accused sought to take child from his wife, the latter threw the baby on the grassy portion of the trail and the baby started to cry. 8. This caused the accused to get furious and with anger beyond his control, he picked up a piece of wood and started hitting his wife until she fell to the ground and complained that she s experiencing severe chest pains. 9. Realizing what he has done, picked up the wife and brought to home then came back for the baby on the grass. 10. Magdalena died despite her husband s effort to alleviate her pains. 11. Accused changed the dress of wife and reported incident to the Barangay Captain who brought him to Policeman Arellosa to whom accused surrendered. He also brought the piece of wood he used to beat his wife. 12. Charged of parricide. He first pleaded not guilty but changed it to guilty upon being re-arraigned. He was permitted to establish the mitigating circumstances which were invoked. A. voluntary surrender B. plea of guilty c.he acted upon impulse so powerful as naturally to have produced passion and obfuscation. 13. The RTC sentenced him to reclusion perpetual 14. On appeal, the accused contends: o There s lack of intent to kill o Art 49 proper applicable penalty when crime committed different from that intended. o The court erred in on following mandatory sequence of procedures for the correct applicable penalty o It also erred in denying the accused of the benefits of the ISLAW. 15. He avers that the penalty for physical injuries only and not parricide should be imposed on him
ISSUE: Whether or not the accused is guilty of physical injuries only and not parricide since there was no intent to kill on his part and that the result of the crime is different from that intended RULING: The Court in complete accord with and sustained the ruling of the lower court and that the accused is not entitled to the benefits of the ISLAW. y Art. 49 does not apply to cases where more serious consequences not intended by the offender result from his felonious act because under art. 4, par 1 of the same Code, he is liable for all the direct and natural consequences of his unlawful act. His lack of intention to commit so grave a wrong is, at best, mitigating. y The fact that appellant intended to maltreat the victim only or inflict physical injuries does not exempt him from liability for the resulting more serious crime. y The RTC added a recommendation that executive clemency be extended to the accused after his service of the minimum of the medium penalty of prision mayor. y The SolGen prays in the People s Brief that in view of the circumstances, recommends for the commutation of the penalty. y The SC expresses hope that absolute or conditional pardon by President or that there be a commutation of his sentence so that he may qualify and be eligible for parole. y There is a manifest repentant attitude of the accused and his remorse for his act which the RTC made particular mention and the recommendation of the SOL GEN as well as the number of years that the accused had been imprisoned. y The SC said that its recommendation should be promptly brought to the attention of the President by the proper authority in whose custody the accused has been placed. PEOPLE vs PEDRO MALABAGO y VILLAESPIN December 2, 1996; niLo Proof of spouse relationship in parricide: marriage certificate or in its absence, oral testimony of the accused. Facts: 1. On January 5, 1994, at about 7:00 in the evening, Guillerma Romano was tending her sari-sari store in Barangay Gulayon, Dipolog City. 2. Guillerma's daughter, Letecia Romano Malabago, arrived and sat on one of the benches outside the store and was also joined by Allandel, Letecia's fourteen-year old son.
3. 4. 5.
A few minutes later, accused-appellant came and interrupted his wife and mother-in-law's conversation. He and Letecia began arguing. Guillerma turned away but heard the couple's altercation over money and appellant's jealousy of someone. Guillerma heard Letecia cried out "Agay! She saw Letecia's face bloodied with a slash along her right ear. Appellant was facing Letecia, and with a bolo in his hand, struck her again, this time hitting the lower left side of her face, from the lips down to the neck. Letecia fell to the ground. Guillerma rushed towards her daughter and shouted for help. She was lifeless. Appellant fled to DodongOpulentisima's house. DodongOpulentisima later called the police. They came, fetched appellant and brought him to their station. The trial court upheld the prosecution and on May 10, 1994 convicted accused-appellant of parricide and sentenced him to death pursuant to Republic Act No. 7659.
ISSUE: WON the accused should be convicted of parricide? RULING: YES! Parricide is committed when: (1) a person is killed; (2) the deceased is killed by the accused; KEY ELEMENT- relationship: (3) the deceased is the father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or a legitimate other ascendant or other descendant, or the legitimate spouse of the accused. y In the case of parricide of a spouse, the best proof of the relationship between the accused and the deceased is the marriage certificate. In the absence of it, oral evidence of the fact of marriage may be considered by the court if such proof is not objected to. - The testimony of the accused that he was married to the deceased is an admission against his penal interest. It is a confirmation of presumption that they are husband and wife. The essential elements of the crime of parricide like appellant's marriage to Letecia, the cause of Letecia's death and appellant's participation therein were facts already established by the prosecution to qualify the offense as parricide. No aggravating circumstance of treachery because the appellant hacked his wife in the midst of a sudden, unscripted heated argument and the appellant was not carrying his bolo at that time. Mitigating circumstance: Appellant testified that he voluntarily surrendered to the police when they fetched him at DodongOpulentisima's house.
legitimate or illegitimate and or any of his ascendants or descendants or his spouse shall be guilty of parricide and shall be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death.Panganiban Parricide (Bon) Facts: 0 This is a case as a resolution of an earlier case which involves MarivicGenosa who was found Guilty of parricide aggravated by treachery sentencing her of death. Exhumation of the body of the victim and the re-examination of the cause of death of the husband b. Semper praesumiturmatrimonion the presumption that a man and a woman deporting them as husband and wife had verily entered into a lawful contract of marriage. she saw by the gas lamp that both are pulling a piece of lawanti and each tried to take possession of it. her legitimate husband. her act of killing her husband was equivalent to self defense. They may be his father . Cabanilla by previous marriage 3. It was noted that Marivic killed Ben Genosa. the petitioner already picked up her palo-palo and hit him 2. Vitug J. 67 yrs old Living with them is Rosaria s daughter . Even Milagros testified that it was her mother s husband. Rolando on the other hand testified that indeed they are husband and wife. Should there be exhumation and re-examination of the victim s body? Should the appellant be submitted to psychologists or psychiatrists to determine her state of mind at the time of killing? . As she peeped. 2000. The phrase whether legitimate or illegitimate refers the relationship between the accused and his victim. She also argues that under the surrounding circumstances. Marivic claims that she did not lie in the manner of killing her husband (by shooting him rather than smashing him) and that she suffered abuse in the hands her husband. she should not be acquitted because there was no unlawful aggression y The burden of proof in self defense is on the accused who must show by strong. Milagros V. 2.The penalty imposable to appellant is reclusion perpetua. with hard use of deadly weapon. Issue: 1.another quarrel took place and this time Milagros grudgingly went upstairs and tried instead to put her child to sleep. she was convicted with parricide and on appeal she prayed that he she be acquitted on the basis of self-defense or in alternative that she be held guilty only for homicide rather than of parricide. y By her own admission. Feb 10 1992. Genosa September 29. Rosaria and Juan had a heated argument and Milagros entreated them to stop but the argument still continued 4. y Art 11 of the RPC provides the elements of self defense :(1) unlawful aggression ( which is the condition sine qua non) (2) reasonable necessity of means employed by the accused to prevent or repeal it (3) and lastly is the lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. Rosaria then left straggling juan and surrendered to the police and voluntarily disclose what happen before Rolando ( son of Juan by his 1st wife). No. 7. On the night of Feb 9 1992.mother or child but not the spouse th In this case. The Court did not accept the defense theory of Marivic. Facts: 1. 5. she could hear that the quarrel had become violent. 1 2 3 4 Issues: 1. 2. The following day. In this case. As Juan released the lawanti to get his bolo. People v. y y Rosaria Igancio. Article 246 of the RPC defines and penalizes the crime of parricide. y any person who shall kill his father . 6. Juan died 8. In TC. J. WON she should be acquitted ? 2.44 yrs old. PEOPLE v IGNACIOI March 26 1997. the petitioner only thought that her husband would strike her. mother or child. Rosaria declared in court that the victim was her 4 husband. While Milagros was upstairs. Thus she prays for the following: a. lived with her husband Juan Ignacio. clear and convincing evidence that the killing is justified and that therefore there is no criminal liability. Submit the accused appellant for examination by qualified psychologists and psychiatrist to determine the state of mind at the time of killing the spouse and allowing the report of such experts to be of the record of the case for purposes of automatic review and allowing partial re-opening of the case to admit the testimonies of the experts. Rosario picked up a palo-palo and hit juan on the nape. In fact her own daughter Milagros belied Rosaria s testimony who declared that even before the victim could get his bolo. Is she guilty of parricide? Held/ Rationale: 1.
she remains to allow herself to be abused in order not to perpetuate the violence. and shot Lina and Arnold Amparado. the shooting must be understood to be the continuation of the pursuit of the victim by the accused-appellant. Since the killing was without intent the court cannot decide that it was murder and the shooting of Lina and Arnold should be understood as to have no intent as well but is still punishable by physical injures via negligence. Finding that there is legal and jurisprudential lacuna with respect to this. 1987 <You can kill your unfaithful wife if you see her do it infront of you> y y y y y Facts: 1. Though quite a length of time. The woman on the other hand. 247. 1984 Francisco Abarka shot and killed Khingsley Paul Koh. Article 247 prescribes the following elements: o that a legally married person surprises his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person. minor battery occurs and the woman tries to pacify the batterer. The court cannot deny the appellant of her opportunity to offer defense for criminal conviction must be based on guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that the accused is facing the possibility of death. there is already a profound relief from the husband and wife after the acute battery. 5.Held: 1. acute battering incident and tranquil loving phase. - No. In the first stage. convinces herself that such battery will not happen anymore and that his partner changed. It only requires that the death caused be the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the accused after chancing upon his spouse in the basest act of infidelity. Francisco ran away and got himself a gun aswell . 8. The man realizes his cruelty and tries to make up for it and asks forgiveness. On last stage.246) because the relationship of Marivic and Ben comes within the purview of the said article. These elements are present in this case. Francisco got home after fetching his daughter from school Found his wife and Khing in the act of love when he returned The Khing got a gun and pointed it at Francisco. The trial court. Any legally married person who. Genosa sdefense was not given merit because there was failure to show the cycle of battered wife syndrome. Yes. Battered Wife Syndrome is described through its three phases namely: tension building phase. and o that he kills any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter. 247 of the revised penal code. In the subsequent case. 4. Katrina Legarda) raised the Battered wife syndrome as a viable plea within the concept of self defense. had passed between the time the accused-appellant discovered his wife having sexual intercourse with the victim and the time the latter was actually shot. Note that these three phases should occur at least twice. y ART. Decision: The case was remanded to the Trial court fot the reception of expert psychological and/or psychiatric opinion on the battered wife syndrome Note: - This case is under parricide (Art. Held: Yes. shall kill any of them or both of them in the act or immediately thereafter. The killing must be the direct by-product of the accused's rage. 2. and must not have been influenced by external factors. it could be a possible modifying circumstance that could affect the criminal liability or the penalty of the accused. But the killing should have been actually motivated by the same blind impulse. about one hour. 7. 2. 3. brutal and at times fatal battery occurs. 6. therefore erred. shall suffer the penalty of destierro. or shall inflict upon them any serious physical injury. July 15. Issues: Francisco returned home and did not find anyone Francisco went to Khing smajong hangout and shot him but accidentally shot Lina and Arnold too (Khing sneighbors) RTC: Guilty of murder and double frustrated murder WON the court erred in making its decision. having surprised his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another person. On the second stage. People v. Death or physical injuries inflicted under exceptional circumstances. The counsel of this case (Atty. The prayer for exhumation is immaterial since the act of proving of manner of killing the victim should have been done in the trial court. the crime Francisco committed falls under Art. The batterer takes domination and the woman only thinks that she cannot reason with him and cannot resist him. However. Abarca September 14. in convicting the accused-appellant of murder.
7. each resting his hand on the shoulder of the other. the incident would have happened there and then and not some 60 meters away from the building. The victim was already retreating backwards until he reached the fence of the town plaza when AGUILAR fired his revolver at the former hitting him above the right knee. Despite the fact that he was already hit& wounded. 5. Pat. Was the conviction of Izon&Joson as co-principals in the crime of Murder correct? Was the court correct in holding that although there was no conspiracy between the 4 police officers. 3. Chief of Police Adriano Canlas arrived & asked what was going on. De la Cruz took the knife from Tayag&gave it to Pat. b. 13. But Tayag denied cursing the 2 & informed the chief that Aguilar was forcing him to give up his knife. Evidently the means employed by the police tended directly & specially to insure the execution of the crime without risk to themselves arising from any defense which the victim might have made. Joson were there too. 11. Aguilar told Tayag to go to the office of the chief of police. Hearing the shot. Specifically that the slug found from the knee of Tayag was from the Revolver of Buensuceco. 4. Aguilar. The Chemistry Reports on the paraffin tests of IZON and JOSON showed positive results. 2. April 21. he found that the service pistol of Aguilar had been fired & had 3 empty shells & 3 live ammunitions left. 3.Romualdo-Espiritu proceeded to the municipal building and investigated on the crime. If. He didn t want to the give knife because he was not making any trouble. Revolvers. they are guilty of Murder under Art.Because: a. So. Izon& Pat. 2. Since Mallari& Aguilar were holding guns. However. 248 of RPC? Though he claimed to have acted independently. 1984 FACTS: 1. Inside. &possibly immobilized. under Art 248 of the RPC. Tayag turned about. AGUILAR followed the victim right after the latter hurriedly left the office of the Chief of Police. BUENSUCESO. and that of Buensuceso s had been fired as well & had 4 empty shells & 2 live ammunitions left. Jose Buensuceso. THE COURT FOUND SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE BACKED UP BY THE CREDIBLE TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESS. more or less nine in number. 1967 between 5-6pm. Finding out that some police officers were involved. 3. 9. Tayag hurriedly left the office but he was followed by Pat. AGUILAR's plea of self-defense is evidently unmeritorious. even at his back. retreated backwards until he reached the fence of the plaza. Aguilar &Tayag when the latter still refused to give his fan knife.38 cal. 8.PEOPLE v BUENSUCESO September 28. 7. Mallari& Aguilar went to the waiting shed to intercept Tayag& took opposite sides of the road.witness Apolonio Salvador saw Patrolman Rodolfo Aguilar &PariseoTayag conversing as they were walking side by side. the latter fired his upward.38 calibre service revolvers. ISSUE: 1. The autopsy showed that Tayag died as a result of 4 gunshot wounds inflicted by . 2. Aguilar was trying to take the fan knife of Tayag. 6. IZON. 12. as contended.Tayag agreed 4. but could not take it because Tayag prevented him from taking it. but it has not been shown which wound was inflicted by each assailant. The on-the-spot inspection by Sgt. going towards the municipal building. . Therefore confirming Salvador s declaration that they were in the vicinity of the crime at the time it happened. There is ample evidence establishing that AGUILAR. and JOSON had fired their guns at the victim hitting him on different parts of his body. Tayag was seen lying prostrate near the back of a jeep parked about 60 meters away from the municipal building. 1. to be sure. 5. 8. Fidel de la Cruz came too.Tayag ran towards his house but was followed by de la Cruz without a gun. 10.Then there were several successive gun shots. Aguilar shot him above the knee. Was there treachery on the part of Aguilar when he killed Tayag? SUPREME COURT: YES TO ALL. Pat.Espiritu right after the incident. but whenTayag was near the wooden fence about a knee high. the victim had thrust his knife at AGUILAR inside the Municipal Building malting the former the unlawful aggressor. he was still subjected to successive shots as shown by the wounds that he had received. All 4 of the police officers were seen by the witness Salvador to have been present at the crime scene at armed with . The crime was qualified by TREACHERY hence it s MURDER. Although it has not been established as to which wound was inflicted by each accused theCourt held that where the victim died as a result of wounds received from several persons acting independently of each other. all of the assailants are liable for the death of the victim. The Ballistic examination proved that the empty shells of ammunition were from the guns of BUENSUCESO & AGUILAR. The 4 police officers were charged of Murder. Pat. c. Sgt. Aguilar said that the two of them (Aguilar &Canlas) had been cursed by Tayag. but when Tayag was about to leave the office.a heated argument took place between Pat. 9. After the commotion.Mallari& De la Cruz. 6.
of prisioncorreccional as maximum. 9. of arresto mayor as minimum to 4 y. 2. The two with their companions were drunk.249 . - People v. . they made fun of him by making him dance. there was an absence of proof that accused has reason to kill the deceased before the incident.Medialdea Homicide through reckless imprudence (Bon) Facts: 1. 1988. During a town fiesta in a public plaza. Later. o Mitigating circumstance of no intention to commit so grave a wrong may be given in his favour. When they saw Miranda walking nearby. homicide is committed by a person who is not falling under the provision of Art. Samson (another accused) and Pugay saw Gabion (a friend) in the ferris wheel. 246 who kills another person through the enumerated circumstances in Art. kills another without the attendance of the circumstances enumerated in Art. Likewise. The act was mearly for purpose of making fun and thus treachery cannot be deduced from such. Miranda died although he was rushed to the hospital. Samson lit Miranda making a human torch out of him. although it was not what was intended. Also. People v.Elements of Murder is that any person not falling in Art. 248 (just see Art. J. Pugay November 17. Gabion testified that the two (Pugay and Samson) were stunned when they saw the deceased burning. 4. Issue: Did the trial Court erred in their decision? Held: Yes. Not contented of what they were doing. Decision:Pugay is guilty of homicide through reckless imprudence sentenced a range of 4 mo. The stench of gasoline could have not skipped his notice which shows his negligence on his actions. Pugay s argument is untenable. Samson is guilty of Homicide sentenced of 8 years of prision mayor as minimum to 14 years of reclusion temporal as maximum. J. Tayag s killing was aggravated by abuse of superior strength as shown by the number of assailants. Also. Miranda (deceased) was a retardate and is a friend of the accused Pugay (accused). Gabion tried to stop Pugay but the latter was already pouring the gasoline. Samson lit Miranda making a human torch out of him. Samson merely intended to burn the clothes. 1988. The two with their companions were drunk. Pugay in his statement admitted that he poured the gasoline believing it was water and then Samson set him on fire. The proper offense are Homicide through reckless imprudence for Pugay and Homicide for Samson. o 3.246. 8. . Miranda (deceased) was a retardate and is a friend of the accused Pugay (accused). a felony defined in the RPC. Miranda died although he was rushed to the hospital. Pugay grabbed a can of gasoline and poured such to Miranda. Pugay grabbed a can of gasoline and poured such to Miranda. Not contented of what they were doing. note that burning clothes may cause physical injuries. First there was no attendant qualifying circumstance found. and 2 mo. Gabion tried to stop Pugay but the latter was already pouring the gasoline. However. which was however. No other circumstances modify the commission of the crime. 5.10. Pugay November 17.Medialdea Homicide through reckless imprudence (Bon) Facts: 6. When they saw Miranda walking nearby. For Samson: o He just committed homicide since no qualifying circumstance was proven. absorbed by treachery. Article 4 applies where criminal liability is still incurred although the wrongful act is different from what was intended for. Samson (another accused) and Pugay saw Gabion (a friend) in the ferris wheel. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. Pugay in his statement admitted that he poured the gasoline believing it was water and then Samson set him on fire.248 for the 6 circumstances).For Pugay o He just committed homicide through reckless imprudence. On the other hand. Later. 7. During a town fiesta in a public plaza. they made fun of him by making him dance. Samson on the other hand argued that Pugay did pour the gasoline but he did not see who set Miranda on fire. Giving him benefit of the doubt. Samson on the other hand argued that Pugay did pour the gasoline but he did not see who set Miranda on fire. The trial court rendered that Pugay and Samson were guilty of the crime of murder and availing Pugay a mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong.
3. 4. Samson merely intended to burn the clothes.10. The stench of gasoline could have not skipped his notice which shows his negligence on his actions. 248 (just see Art.Elements of Murder is that any person not falling in Art. 6. First there was no attendant qualifying circumstance found. 1974. He should instead be convicted of the complex crime of parricide with unintentional abortion On Pedro s competency as a witness: y The trial court determined Pedro s competency before he was allowed to testify under oath y He has a strong sense of moral duty to tell the truth even though it should lead to his father s conviction. Likewise. o Mitigating circumstance of no intention to commit so grave a wrong may be given in his favour. accused FilomenoSalufrania contends that his wife died of stomach pain and that he tried native treatments to alleviate the pain. Issue: Did the trial Court erred in their decision? Held: Yes. o Pugay s argument is untenable. 246 who kills another person through the enumerated circumstances in Art.249 . a felony defined in the RPC. Gabion testified that the two (Pugay and Samson) were stunned when they saw the deceased burning. Samson is guilty of Homicide sentenced of 8 years of prision mayor as minimum to 14 years of reclusion temporal as maximum. Also. The accused was convicted of the said crime and was sentenced to suffer the penalty of death. of prisioncorreccional as maximum.For Pugay o He just committed homicide through reckless imprudence. the son of the accused testified that at about 6pm off December 3. .248 for the 6 circumstances). note that burning clothes may cause physical injuries. 5. there was an absence of proof that accused has reason to kill the deceased before the incident. homicide is committed by a person who is not falling under the provision of Art. although it was not what was intended. On the other hand. kills another without the attendance of the circumstances enumerated in Art. FilomenoSalufrania was charged with the crime of parricide with intentional abortion Pedro Salufrania. Pedro testified that after killing his mother. PEOPLE VS SALUFRANIA BEL FACTS: 1. 7. 8.For Samson: o He just committed homicide since no qualifying circumstance was proven. He contends that the trial court failed to determine Pedro s incompetence because he was only 13 years old when he testified and only 11 years old when the offense was charged. He further questions the competence of Dr. . this shows that he fully appreciate the meaning of an oath . The trial court rendered that Pugay and Samson were guilty of the crime of murder and availing Pugay a mitigating circumstance of lack of intent to commit so grave a wrong.246. Pedro saw blood ooze from the eyes and nose of his mother. of arresto mayor as minimum to 4 y. his father and his mother MarcianaAbuyo had a quarrel During the said quarrel the accused box his pregnant wife on the stomache and strangled her to death. However. The act was mearly for purpose of making fun and thus treachery cannot be deduced from such.Dyquiangco as an expert witness since it was his first time to conduct an autopsy on a cadaver which had been buried for about a week. The proper offense are Homicide through reckless imprudence for Pugay and Homicide for Samson. Decision:Pugay is guilty of homicide through reckless imprudence sentenced a range of 4 mo. the accused used a hammock to cover the body of the deceased. He further allege that the accused threatened to kill him and his sibling should he reveal the true cause of his mother s death On the other hand. ISSUE: Did the trial court erred in its decision? RULING Yes. Giving him benefit of the doubt. Article 4 applies where criminal liability is still incurred although the wrongful act is different from what was intended for. and 2 mo. 2.
He ordered her to lie down on the floor and then mounted her. appellant dragged complainant up the stairs (p. All of a sudden. appellant could not fully penetrate her. 3.y y As to Pedro s change of answer when asked whether he was threatened by his uncle to testify against his father. he commanded her to look for a room. he had. 14. from that 2.the victim's testimony from the time she knocked on the door of the municipal building up to the time she was brought to the hospital was corroborated by Pat. At said position. a) Clearly. After her classmates had left. conducted similar post-mortem examinations on 10 other occasions. Eastern Samar. she knocked at the door of her boarding house. it cannot be merely incidental to a killing y Accused intent to cause abortion has not been sufficiently established.that the offender has performed all the acts of execution which would produce the felony and . appellant had both his hands flat on the floor she escaped by dashing out to the next room and locked herself in. By using force or intimidation. When the woman is under twelve years of age. only a small part again of his penis was inserted into her vagina. 2. in the crime of rape. somebody held her and poked a knife to her neck. Appellant then lay down on his back and commanded her to mount him. Joseph's College at Borongan. y The accused is liable for the complex crime of parricide with unintentional abortion PEOPLE vs CEILITO ORITA alias "Lito. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious and 3. niLo <No frustrated crime of rape> Facts: 1. is not sufficient proof to show an intent to cause abortion. NO FRUSTRATED RAPE: The requisites of a frustrated felony are: . y The accused must have merely intended to kill the victim but not necessarily to cause the abortion. . 1990. Abayan was a 19-year old freshman student at the St. Complainant Cristina S. however. With his left arm wrapped around her neck and his right hand poking a "balisong" to her neck." April 3. Appellant was a Philippine Constabulary (PC) soldier. it only shows that Pedro was confused with the question. March 20. 1983. from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim he actually attains his purpose and. At this stage. In this position. she darted to the municipal building and went to the policemen. The Supreme Court was convinced that there was rape because: . even though neither of the circumstances mentioned in the two next preceding paragraphs shall be present. Later on the affirmed his answer that he wasn t threatened at all. complainant arrived at her boarding house. Donceras. She then recognized appellant who was a frequent visitor of another boarder.Interpreting the findings as indicated in the medical certificate which is a conclusive proof that there was struggle against force and violence exerted on the victim. She fled to another room and jumped out through a window. On Dr. Even if there were some discrepancies. The trial court convicted the accused of frustrated rape since there was no conclusive evidence of penetration of the genital organ of the victim. Her classmates had just brought her home from a party. . His testimony remains unruffled. however.Dyquiangco s competence y Although this was his first time to examine a cadaver that was buried for a week. 4. such are just minors and didn t affect his credibility as a witness. When they reached the second floor. On Abortion: There must be intent to cause the abortion to be guilty of intentional abortion.that the felony is not produced due to causes independent of the perpetrator's will. He made her hold his penis and insert it in her vagina. 5. y Mere boxing of the stomach taken together with the immediate strangling of the victim in a fight. ibid). 6. She followed his order as he continued to poke the knife to her. Issue: Is the trial court correct of convicting the accused of frustrated rape? RULING: Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code defines and enumerates the elements of the crime of rape: 1. Only a portion of his penis entered her as she kept on moving.
as in inflammation) and tender. Horrified she cursed him. without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction. 2. y However the act of touchng should be understood here as inherently part of the enrty of the penis into the labia of the female organ and not mere touching alone of the mons pubis or the pudendum. Primo contends that it was impossible for Corazon to give vivid description of the alleged sexual contact from where she stood during that time and that the absence of any external signs of physical injuries or of penetration of Crysthel s private parts strengthen his innocents Issue: is he guilty of rape? Held: NO. He also contends that it was impossible for him to commit rape as the sister of Crysthel was with them playing and that the place was within the family compound enough for him to deter from committing such act. Primo was apprehended by those who answered Corazon s call fro help 8. Zamora did not rule out penetration of the genital organ of the victim. Primo was trying to insert his penis into Crysthel s vagina. perfect penetration is not essential. he is guilty only of attempted rape as the prosecutor utterly failed to prove that Primo s penis was able to penetrate not matter how slight it is Rationale: y In concluding that carnal knowledge took place. Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient. Accused found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and sentenced to reclusion perpetua as well as to indemnify the victim in the amount of P30. . 9. 6. around 4pm. she heard one of her daughters crying and when she heard Ayo ko.ayo ko! she rush upstairs and saw Primo Campuhan inside her children s room kneeling before Crysthelwhose pajamas and panty were already removed. 3. Primo now contends that Corazan s testimony should not be given weight or credence since it was punctured with implausible statements and improbabilities so inconsistent with human nature and experience. The next layer is the labia majora or the outer lips of the female organ composed of the outer convex surface and inner surface. b) We have set the uniform rule that for the consummation of rape. According to Corazan. y Pudendum is a collective term for the female genital organs that are visible in the perineal area. the felony is consummated. because he has performed the last act necessary to produce the crime.00. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ. People v Campuhan March 30 2000. At the ground floor. Pamintuan went down from nd the 2 floor of their house to prepare Milo for her two children where one is Crysthel ( 4yrs old) .000. y Jurisprudence provides that in order for rape to be consummated the penis must have entered the labia majora and not the mere stroke or touching of the mons pubis of the pudendeum. while Primo s short pants were down to his knees. Was there penetration of genital organ of the victim? y it is stated in the medical certificate that the vulva was erythematous (which means marked by abnormal redness of the skin due to capillary congestion. the victim positively testified that there was penetration.( Corazon s brother) who was then busy filling small plastic bags with water to be frozen into ice As she was busy preparing the drinks. Lastly. He merely testified that there was uncertainty whether or not there was penetration. Primo Campuhan was found guilty of guitlty of statutory rape and was sentenced to extreme penalty of death. Anent this testimony. Primo then push aside Corazon and ran while corazan called for help 7. nor is the rupture of the hymen necessary y The mere touching of the external genetalia by the penis capable of consummating the sexual act is sufficient to constitute carnal knowledge. On April 25 1996. In the absence of any showing that there was touching the crime could be attempted rape or acts of lasciviousness. Thus. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender. 5. even if only partially. Ma. It bears emphasis that Dr. Directly beneath the Labia majora is labia minora. rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the female organ because not all acts of execution was performed. Bellosillo J Facts: 1. Corazon P.moment also all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished. full penetration of the vaginal orifice is not an essential ingredient. she saw Primo Campuhan. Seconds later. Mons pubis is the rounded eminence that becomes hairy after puberty and is instantly visible within the surface. helper of Conrado Plata Jr. The offender merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts. 4. y The prosecution utterly failed to prove that Primo s penis was able to penetrate not matter how slight it is. Necessarily.
or lack of it. 2. Manila. Chess requires concentration.000. While the penetration of Semion s penis can only go as deep as Marichelle s labia because of her age. Armando Ayroso were playing chess in the sala of the apartment. The medical examination proves that the trauma on Marichelle s vagina cannot be caused by an accident. Statutory Rape is the carnal knowledge of a woman below 12 years of age. Roberto V. He inserted his finger into the . 4. He kissed her and fondled her breasts. Under Article 335 (3) Revised Penal Code. Villapana Facts: People vs. damages decreased to P20. She narrated what happened to her to Bernardine. Semion then laid Marichelle down. 2. she put on her garments. Semion called out to Marichelle to go inside his bedroom or "sleeping quarters" at one end of the sala of the ground floor. 6. Rape was still consummated because It is enough that there is proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or pudendum of the female organ. Issue: Is the conviction of Semion by the trial court correct? Held: Yes. Michael. to rape Marichelle. 3.000 from P50.At 10 or 11 a. old security guard. The absence of hymeneal laceration adequately explains why Marichelle did not feel any pain during the attempted sexual intercourse 5. J. Marichelle was playing "takbuhan" alone at the ground floor of the two-story apartment of Semion. She was not aware of the wrongfulness of what was being done to her was rape. is immaterial. Bernardine had Marichelle undergo a physical exam.. All the elements of attempted is present. 7. 2. Proof of intimidation or force used on the woman. and on the way home noticed that her jogging pants were wet. He was the neighbor of Tomas and Bernardine Carlos. Corazon insist that the Primo did not restrain himself from pursuing his wicked intention despite her timely appearance however the court is not persuaded because it is inconsistent with man s instinct of self-preservation to remain where he is and persist in satisfying his lust even when he knows well that his dastardly acts have already been discovered or witnesses by no less than the mother herself The possibility of Primo s penis entering the vagina is negated by the child s owen assertion that she resisted it by putting both her legs close together. Sampaloc. 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 spontaneous desistance. and placed them beside her feet. She agreed. her vagina and then forcibly and repeatedly introduced his penis into her vagina.m. His wife was in Batangas at the time and his grandson. 3. or lack of it. arayko Under art 6 in relation to art 335 of the RPC. 4. Sarmiento In Statutory Rape. It is possible for an experienced man like Semion in just one minute. but failed. Mangalino 15 February 1990. Semion was charged with statutory rape and convicted of reclusion perpetua. she shouted ayo ko. although "butas-butas. Marichelle's complete innocence may have facilitated the perpetration of the clime. 07 March 1984 . it can easily be drawn that Primo s kneeling position rendered an unbridled observation impossible as Primo s right hand was blocking Corazon s view. RamillasDulce and his wife s nephew. Ramil and Armando were engrossed with their game that it was possible for Semion to rape Marichelle. Marichelle. Proof of intimidation or force used on the woman. old daughter.ayo ko instead of arayko. 5. 10. she did not feel any pain but just felt unhappy. removed her jogging pants. Garcia certified that there Marichelle had no hymeneal lacerations but there was genital trauma and it was caused by an accident. 7. When Marichelle heard Michael calling. People v. Tomas and Bernardine had a 6 yr. Once inside the bedroom. NBI Medico Legal Officer Dr.y y y y Crysthel testimony is in doubt because he was not able to explain her position during the time of the commission of the crime that enabled her to see clearly and sufficiently that there was indeed a contact and that from her narration . The argument that Marichelle should have cried out or struggled is untenable. Semion handed Marichelle a P2 bill and told her not to tell anybody about his calling her to his bedroom. Semion appealed that it was impossible for him to rape Marichelle because it was broad daylight and many people were in the ground floor when the alleged rape happened. without attracting the attention of the people inside the apartment. is immaterial Facts: 1. and residing at 1597-D Honradez Street. the conviction of Semion by the trial court is correct. Marichelle s 4 yr. 9. and the divider. 1. 6. 8." was sufficient to conceal the commission of the bestial act. Conviction affirmed. called out to her to fetch her. SemionMangalino was a 53 yr. old cousin.
He and Maria were sweethearts b.1. b. 6. it is difficult to prove it but more difficult for the person accused. b. herself and her daughter from any harm. and yet she was able to shout. In the case at bar numerous circumstances detract from the credibility of Maria's version of what happened on the night of April 16. ii. No. One on the evidence and one on the decision. During trial Maria s testimonies were inconsistent hence should not be believed. The judge made a mistake because there were different judges who looked took charge of the case. 4. though innocent. it should not be accepted unless her sincerity and candor are free from suspicion. 2. Eduardo (20+) and Maria (middle aged widow with four children) lived in the same building Eduardo was convicted of the crime of raping Maria Maria alleges that on April 16. 1976. she was awakened when a person was trying to pry open her window. or do something to repel the intruder. Maria initiated the intercourse infact she invited me! c. a. 2. 3. The evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits. small rooms on the ground floor of a two-storey apartment. 1976 a. Thus. "While we have frequently held that the uncorroborated testimony of the offended party in cases of this kind may be sufficient under certain circumstances to warrant conviction. "Araykopo. After Eduardo left she stayed and rested then went to Eduardo s aunt to report it that same night Eduardo alleges that a. so he forced open the door to her room. i. yet from the very nature of the charge and the ease with which it may be made and the difficulty which surrounds the accused in disproving it where the point is as to whether the cohabitation was with or without the use of force or threats. to disprove it. and protect her home. b. A reversal of the trial court's guilty verdict is inevitable. The accused covered her mouth with his own lips so that she could not shout. and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense. which is one of three." d. ii. An accusation for rape can be made with facility. They had sex but it was with consent RTC: guilty of rape Eduardo says a. 5. it is imperative that such testimony should be scrutinized with the greatest caution. tulunganponinyoako. In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where two persons are usually involved. 1. Yes. the Court has no option but to declare that the prosecution has failed to meet the exacting test of moral certainty and proof of guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. and iii. so she sat down and Eduardo entered the room and poked a knife on to her." 1. 3. Eduardo then brought her to the kitchen and threatened her and she was able to utter tulungnanmokonanayko while Eduardo was raping her c." c. The normal reaction of any person under such circumstances would have been to call for help or make an outcry to awaken her neighbors and/or call their attention. (3) settled principles to guide an appellate court in reviewing the evidence in rape cases: i. the testimony of the injured woman should not be received with precipitate incredulity. That person failed in his attempt to open the window. complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution. Covering the mouth of another with one's own lips is certainly not an effective way of preventing the former from shouting Issues: WON the change of the judge matters? WON the presumption that when a woman says she was raped is true may be over turned? Held: 1. nanaykopo. and when the conviction depends at any vital point upon her uncorroborated testimony. While she was sleeping with her 7 year old daughter when she noticed someone trying to enter the room. the testimony of the . Sleeping with her seven-year old daughter. "in crimes against chastity. The court in this case should just exert extra effort in hearing the case and looking at the evidences.
8. 1. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED. 1975 Elivira together with her mother reported the incident & filed a complaint. 1976 both were found guilty of Rape sentenced to Reclusion Perpetua. They also contended that she was a Tomboy & that she hated Torres for telling his cousin not to maintain their same sex relationship. It seems more likely that. 1. Torres friends agreed to drink & invited Elvira. 5. Balbuena undressed Elvira while Torres is holding her hand. The court found that the essential elements constitutive of the crime rape had been duly established by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. The accused denied the allegations & gave their alibis. That fact does not make it improbable for the two drunken appellants to violate her. SUPREME COURT: YES. The fear & shock she felt was more than sufficient to restrain her from filing a case right away. 9. Torres also raped Elvira. 6. Aside from the fact that the test was conducted one month after the incident. Elvira s delay on the filing of the complaint may result from the fact that she was afraid of the threats done by the rapists and she s worried about her on going classes. ComadreMiling testified that when complainant went to her room at 2 'clock in the morning of April 17. 5. It s not easy for a Filipina to come out in the open in a situation where public contempt & ridicule would possibly result in the prosecution of the Rape case. PEOPLE v BALBUENA April 27. 10. . iii. ISSUE: WON the Balbuena & Torres committed the said rape despite the fact that the Medical examination showed no injuries. Elvira was subjected to medical examination & the results concluded that there were no signs of extragenital physical injury but she could have had sexual intercourse with a man on the alleged date. 11. 1984 FACTS: 1. That accused went to bed after the sexual intercourse. 9. Unlikely that someone who rapes a person returns to his own room in the sae house The prosecution was not able to prove properly that the intercourse happened without consent a. After she was raped. August 28. The defense of the accused is relatively weak against the complainant for the evidence is clear that the two rapists employed force in consummating the crime of rape. Elvira was able to escape and ran away home. she relayed the information in a straight and convincing manner despite the lengthy investigation. They said they were in different places doing different things. 3. 2. as appellant claims. 10pm Elvira Polintan was in an apartment with friend Juanito Torres. 1975 Elvira finally told her mother about what happened. They held the drinking party at the apartment of Abelardo Balbuena. 6. After Balbuena. 8. which was a former billiard hall & they drank Gin with other persons. there was not enough struggle on her part for she was too weak to do so considering she was also intoxicated. Elvira felt dizzy & so she asked permission from the group to rest. the court affirmed the ruling of the trial court. Elvira sat down in the corner & cried. It s improbable to say that physical appearance of the woman would not bar these persons from committing the rape. 3. Elvira stands to gain nothing with her revelation & the consequent punishment of the accused. Balbuena also kept on threatening her life & her family. 2. when they took turns in violating her & each participated in holding her hands & covering her mouth." b. 7. "a woman's most precious asset is the purity of her womanhood. The court considered the innate womanhood of the accused 7 the inherent reluctance of the Filipino family to be exposed to the trial scandalizing the Family s name. 1975. Balbuena threatened her not to tell or she ll be killed. The absence of injury nor the dress no being torn does not prove that the rape was not committed. The testimony of Elvira was credible enough to prove that she was violated. August 6. 4. she confessed that they "lost control of themselves iv. Elvira is also no an incredible witness considering that she s a tomboy . October 20. he was able to rape her on the Billiard table. She will resist to the last ounce of her strength any attempt to defile it. 4. So the very fact that she came forward is enough persuasion. and despite her resistance. then she laid down in the bench inside the billiard hall. 1976. There s nothing in the defense evidence that would point out convincingly why Elivira should lie & jeopardize the 2 accused. October 19. 7. they were kissing each other as they were engaged in the sexual act. her clothes were not torn & that she only complained after one month. while Balbuena was covering her mouth. After drinking a half glass of Gin.e.
it should not be accepted unless her sincerity and candor are free from suspicion. (3) settled principles to guide an appellate court in reviewing the evidence in rape cases: 7. . After Eduardo left she stayed and rested then went to Eduardo s aunt to report it that same night 10. Maria alleges that on April 16. Issues: WON the change of the judge matters? WON the presumption that when a woman says she was raped is true may be over turned? Held: 4. 5. Yes. He and Maria were sweethearts b. During trial Maria s testimonies were inconsistent hence should not be believed. the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution. i." c. 1976 a. and when the conviction depends at any vital point upon her uncorroborated testimony.People v. herself and her daughter from any harm. it is imperative that such testimony should be scrutinized with the greatest caution. yet from the very nature of the charge and the ease with which it may be made and the difficulty which surrounds the accused in disproving it where the point is as to whether the cohabitation was with or without the use of force or threats. The judge made a mistake because there were different judges who looked took charge of the case. and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense. An accusation for rape can be made with facility. 1. Eduardo was convicted of the crime of raping Maria 9. 6. and protect her home. Eduardo then brought her to the kitchen and threatened her and she was able to utter tulungnanmokonanayko while Eduardo was raping her c. and iii. Thus. small rooms on the ground floor of a two-storey apartment. Villapana Facts: Eduardo (20+) and Maria (middle aged widow with four children) lived in the same building 8. b. which is one of three. That person failed in his attempt to open the window. "While we have frequently held that the uncorroborated testimony of the offended party in cases of this kind may be sufficient under certain circumstances to warrant conviction. They had sex but it was with consent 11. the testimony of the injured woman should not be received with precipitate incredulity. While she was sleeping with her 7 year old daughter when she noticed someone trying to enter the room." d. b. i. The court in this case should just exert extra effort in hearing the case and looking at the evidences. A reversal of the trial court's guilty verdict is inevitable. it is difficult to prove it but more difficult for the person accused. 1976. so he forced open the door to her room. ii. Maria initiated the intercourse infact she invited me! c. Sleeping with her seven-year old daughter. to disprove it. though innocent. In the case at bar numerous circumstances detract from the credibility of Maria's version of what happened on the night of April 16. Eduardo says a. a. One on the evidence and one on the decision. the Court has no option but to declare that the prosecution has failed to meet the exacting test of moral certainty and proof of guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. "in crimes against chastity. b. or do something to repel the intruder. Eduardo alleges that a. The normal reaction of any person under such circumstances would have been to call for help or make an outcry to awaken her neighbors and/or call their attention. In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where two persons are usually involved. she was awakened when a person was trying to pry open her window. The evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits. so she sat down and Eduardo entered the room and poked a knife on to her. RTC: guilty of rape 12. No.
335. It seems more likely that. (P-v-Asturias) ISSUE: In this case. Covering the mouth of another with one's own lips is certainly not an effective way of preventing the former from shouting a. they were kissing each other as they were engaged in the sexual act. 1976. The trial court found Cesar to be guilty of the crime of rape under p3 of Art 355. Glenda was founded to have a mentally defective intellectual functioning p She has the intellectual capacity of a child between 9 to 12 years old o She prefers playing with small children p SHE IS CAPABLE OF TELLING THE TRUTH Application: 1. Afterwards. 4. she confessed that it was Cesar who is the father of her baby On December 1987.e. ~by Diana Having sexual intercourse with a woman who is a mentally retarded and have the mentality of a 12 year old IS RAPE FACTS: 1." b. and yet she was able to shout. iii. with wife and 8 children Sometime in April 1986. 3. There was a later incident where she described the said incident to be masarap or ticklish 5 months later into her pregnancy.00 Glenda said that there were 4 other succeeding occasions were similar incidents occurred i. P: Cruz. 6. she gave birth to a child 5. p2 (deprived of reason) a. Lack of will may exist under the ff conditions where woman is: i. . Suffering mental deficiency *Carnal knowledge of a woman so weak in intellect as to be incapable of legal consent constitutes rape. she was given P5." 1. RPC: Rape can be committed under any of the ff circumstances: a. When woman is under 12 years of age. Unconscious ii. This is because the elements of rape can still be found in the said instance. "Araykopo. ComadreMiling testified that when complainant went to her room at 2 'clock in the morning of April 17. Glenda Aringo(victim) is a 16 year old mental retardate Cesar Atento (accused) is a 39 year old store-keeper. P-v-Palma: . "a woman's most precious asset is the purity of her womanhood. Cesar is guilty of the crime of rape under Art. She will resist to the last ounce of her strength any attempt to defile it. Glenda willingly let Cesar deflower her. When woman is deprived of reason OR is otherwise unconscious c. even though neither of the circumstances mentioned in the two next preceding paragraphs shall be present 2. she confessed that they "lost control of themselves iv. Glenda is considered to have the mentality of a 9-12 year old. Chief Justice Tolentino: The absence of will determines the existence of rape.g1 DECISION: Decision Affirmed PEOPLE VS DELA CUESTA People v Atento April 26. Cesar was able to persuade her to come to his house and succeeded in deflowering her. 1. The accused covered her mouth with his own lips so that she could not shout. so there is rape. Did the TC made the right decision of convicting him of rape? HELD: YES. 2. 1. nanaykopo. By using force or intimidation b. That accused went to bed after the sexual intercourse. Unlikely that someone who rapes a person returns to his own room in the sae house The prosecution was not able to prove properly that the intercourse happened without consent 7. Mental abnormality or deficiency is enough. regardless of whether it falls under p2 or p3 of Art 355. Totally deprived of reason iii. P-v-Atutubo: It s not required for the offender to be the one who deprive the victim of reason before committing the crime b. Art 335. ii. Copulation with a woman known to be mentally incapable of giving even an imperfect consent is rape c. tulunganponinyoako. * The deprivation of reason need not be complete. as appellant claims. 1991.
should be used in construing the term guardian for the purpose of imposing death penalty. When Mercedes left for Davao. 10. The frame-up allegation was too shallow to be believed. floor 5 consecutive nights. Mere knocking of the pudenda by the accused s penis suffices to constitute rape. y y y The rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is not an essential element of rape. 11. He touched her breast and inserted his finger inside her vagina. y y ISSUE: Is the ruling of the trial court correct? The ruling was partly correct. JIMMY SABREDO y GARBO y 13. y y There was no evidence presented to substantiate his alleged dysfunction. 4. The accused denied the charges and contend that he looked after the child as his own granddaughter. After the said incident. he still may not be sentenced to death because the information filed against him does not specify qualifying circumstance. The niece was not the type of woman to concoct a rape charge against an old man and neighbour for a flimsy reason. 3. 6. The restrictive definition of a guardian. 5. 7. THE SENTENCE IMPOSED WAS WRONG y The mere fact that the mother asked the accused to look after her child while she was away did not constitute relationship of guardian-ward as contemplated by the law. the accused repeatedly did the same act. he inserted it for about an inch deep inside Merma s vagina. y A medical examination is not an indispensible requirement and an absence of such does not affect the verdict of conviction of sufficient evidence is presented. a 9 year old girl lived with her mother Mercedes in one of 3 rooms for rent on the 2nd floor of a house located in Makati. The accused was just a mere custodian or caretaker of the child over whom he exercised a limited authority for a temporary period. Old age does not mean that sexual intercourse is no longer possible. there was no laceration of the hymen.BEL FACTS: 1. Even assuming that he is a guardian. PEOPLE vs. He also contends that he was just framed-up Mercedes niece because she was indebted to him. Also he said that there was a delay in the submission of the child to a medical examination. When alone in a room. Regarding the physical incapacity due to old age. the accused started to kiss Merma and sucked her mouth and tongue. Regarding the 3-day delay in considering the medical examination. 8. as age is not a criterion taken alone in determining sexual interest and capability of middle-aged and older people. He avers that he rarely gets erections and that based on the medico-legal findings. 12. 2. MermaBasabas. 9. she left her child in the care of her niece and the accused. from January 12 to 23 1996. that of a legal or judicial guardian. The accused even asked the child to touch his penis and later on. The accused Jovendela Cuesta is a 64-year old man who has been staying at the room rented by Mercedes for about 2 months because his house was being renovated. It was unusual for family members to wait for 3 days since the usual reaction is to subject a victim to a medical examination immediately. The trial court found the accused guilty of 6 counts of rape and sentenced him to suffer death for raping a girl under 18 and the offender is her guardian. . He threatened the child not to report anything to her mother and gave her 20pesos. He also contends that it was just revenge on the part of the owner of the house because he warned Merma that the owner has a pending rape case.
1994 at Cagba. civil status. FACTS: 1) Appellant is the uncle of complainant. niLo Complex crime of forcible abduction with rape: prove the presence of all the elements of forcible abduction. as defined and penalized by Article 342 of the Revised Penal Code was also committed. 1994. by the accused against complainant. to the highway where he made her board a truck for Bogo. . the victims fails to allege "lewd designs" of the accused. The penalty imposed on him is reclusion perpetua. When appellant. In this case. as in fact he did rape her. as well as all the elements of the crime of rape. we are not totally disposed to convict appellant for the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. he brought her to the house of his sister. it is axiomatic that the prosecution must allege and prove the presence of all the elements of forcible abduction. Jimmy's sister then they moved to his nephew in Cagba. Judeliza went to the well near their house. That appellant was moved by lewd designs was shown in regard to rape by his having carnal knowledge of private complainant. Jimmy.He pinched the victim's vagina. Hence. Facts: . .it was consensual or that they were lovers. the rape may then absorb forcible abduction.While it may appear at first blush that forcible abduction. Cebu by appellant and through threats and intimidation brought to various towns in Masbate. to take a bath.that the person abducted is any woman. Masbate. 4) On July 4. 7659 which imposes the death penalty cannot be made to apply in the instant case for two reasons: at the time the rape was committed. with the use of force and intimidation. 2000. 2) On June 27.Judeliza had revealed to him that she was not really her father's daughter but boxed and kicked her when she confided that she really was his niece. on July 4. These are: the commission of sexual intercourse.May 11. with Jimmy closely guarding Judeliza. using a blade. the elements of rape and sexual assault were not all proven. 1994. at around midnight. General Rule: When a complex crime under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code is charged. but only to punish her for deceiving him about their kinship. the crime committed by appellant is simple rape only. He is the younger brother of her father. 1994. without her consent and against her will. Nilda brought her to the police where Judeliza reported her ordeal. There. Then.that the abduction is against her will. sexually assaulted Judeliza. 7) Trial Court found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape under Article 48 in relation to Article[s] 335 and 342 of the Revised Penal Code and is meted the extreme penalty of death. Her sworn affidavit and her testimony in open court establish the basic elements of rape. He stayed with Judeliza's family in Cebu for more than a year. Puno J. 3) He brought her to Masbate. 5) On July 8. where they stayed at the house of Conchita. against her will. armed with a blade. R. or reputation. Application: The prosecution's evidence clearly shows that the victim was forcibly taken at knifepoint from Borbon.that the abduction is with lewd designs. Tugbo. . The elements of forcible abduction are: . but insisted that: . Masbate where stayed from June 29 to July 5.A. 6) Prosecutor filed an information and Jimmy admitted having sexual relations with Judeliza. The accused is declared guilty beyond reasonable doubt of simple rape only as defined and penalized under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. We note that while the information sufficiently alleges the forcible taking of complainant from Cebu to Masbate. forcibly took away complainant for the purpose of sexually assaulting her. regardless of age. Nilda. there was no complex crime of forcible abduction with rape: . as well as all the elements of the crime of rape.the information did not allege that offender and offended party were relatives within the third degree of consanguinity. People v Arillas June 19 2000. Jimmy inserted three fingers into her vaginal orifice and cruelly pinched it. No. where he passed her off as his "wife". private complainant was already more than eighteen years of age. 1994. . Jimmy grabbed and forcibly dragged her at knife's point. such as forcible abduction with rape. Cebu. . ISSUE: WON the accused should be convicted of the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape? RULING: NO.
However. 8. y y y the information and if it is not alleged but proven it will be considered as an aggravating circumstances since the latter may be proven even if not alleged . Aside from the fact that he failed to prove this. 23 1995. 16. Assistant Local Civil Registrar. It was Amor s 1st time. then her father called to prepare for breakfast. Amor Arillas was sweeping their backyard.it was held that for age as a special qualifying circumstances it must be alleged in 1. Assistant Local Civil Registrar. her father embraced her and forcibly kissing her. Rationale: y The contention of Romeo that the case filed against him were out of illfeeling will not stand. On appeal. He also reason the it was due to the ill-motive of his in-laws because he left his brother-in-law drunk during a fiesta in Bula 10. On April 1 1996.reasonable doubt exist as to his guilt Issue: Is he guilty of rape? Held: yes. Romeo contends that even if his defense is merely denial and alibi. After the 2nd incident. The positive assertions of his daughter that he raped her are given a greater weight. she finally found the courage to report the incident. She was afraid of her father and did not want her family broken so she didn t tell anyone and hope that the bestial act will not happen. Amor then underwent medical examination and it was learned from Dr Mylene Chavez Milla that she has 5 old lacerations. In defense. she finally found the courage to report the incident. In defense. her father embraced her and forcibly kissing her. At that time her brothers were grazing their carabao in the mountains. Romeo Arillas was not able to prove that it was physically impossible for him to be at the commission of the crime as he was just in the rice field. However on Feb 10 1996. the father again threaten her not to tell anyone. The purpose of the rule is ti enable the accused to prepare his defense. 4. Minalabac. Amor Arillas was sweeping their backyard. After the 2 incident. testified that Amor was under 18 yrs old. 7. She even testified that Amor s hymen admits two fingers with ease which indicates that penetration was made more than once. 9. She even testified that Amor s hymen admits two fingers with ease which indicates that penetration was made more than once. her sisters were washing clothers in the creek about 300-400 meters away from their house and her mother was selling soft drink and bread in the rice field. Romeo Arillas said that on Dec 23 1995 he was in the farm and that on Feb 10 1996 he was repairing an irrigation pump in San Jose. 13. However on Feb 10 1996. While doing Amor was doing her chore.Two cases were consolidated. Two cases were consolidated. it is highly unbelievable for Amor to falsely accused his father just to advance the ill-feeling of her uncle. Puno J. She was afraid of her father and did not want her family broken so she didn t tell anyone and hope that the bestial act will not happen. testified that Amor was under 18 yrs old. in people v Garcia . P25k as exemplary damages for each raped and P50k as civil indemnity for each count of rape. 19. The penalty should be reclusion perpetua. 23 1995. y TC imposed the penalty of death because Amor was under 18 yrs old at the time of the commission of the crime. then her father called to prepare for breakfast. On April 1 1996. 14. Amor resisted but her father kick her on the right buttocks and successfully had carnal knowledge with her. 18. 20. In the morning of Dec. In the morning of Dec. 3. while preparing for lunch her father again forcibly rape her despite the resistance of Amor. nd 6. The TC was also wrong on awarding P 100 000 as actual damage and moral damages because the prosecution failed to present any evidence regarding actual damages. Camarines Sur. The trial court found Romeo Arillas guilty 11. The appellant then threatened not tell anyone or something bad would happen. 15. the father again threaten her not to tell anyone. her sisters were washing clothers in the creek about 300-400 meters away from their house and her mother was selling soft drink and bread in the rice field. Facts: 12. Romeo Arillas said that on Dec 23 1995 he was in the farm and that on Feb 10 1996 he was repairing an irrigation pump in San Jose. People v Arillas June 19 2000. Romeo Decena. It is the fundamental rule that every element of an offense must be alleged in the complaint. 2. Amor then underwent medical examination and it was learned from Dr Mylene Chavez Milla that she has 5 old lacerations. It was Amor s 1st time. while preparing for lunch her father again forcibly rape her despite the resistance of Amor. Romeo Decena. At that time her brothers were grazing their carabao in the mountains. However Amor is entitled to P50K moral damages as it requires no proof of mental and physical suffering . Amor resisted but her father kick her on the right buttocks and successfully had carnal knowledge with her. The appellant then threatened not tell anyone or something bad would happen. While doing Amor was doing her chore. 17. . y The Trial Court is correct in convicting him but they were wrong on sentencing him to death. 5.
3.it was held that for age as a special qualifying circumstances it must be alleged in the information and if it is not alleged but proven it will be considered as an aggravating circumstances since the latter may be proven even if not alleged . left Rivera and asked permission from Isip to go out with his friends. 11. Per Curiam If a woman over 12 years old was raped. there is more than one circumstance b. de Leon. the facts from which the inferences are derived are proven c. she has to prove there was sexual intercourse and it was done through force. drunk. However Amor is entitled to P50K moral damages as it requires no proof of mental and physical suffering . RestitutoViernes. it is highly unbelievable for Amor to falsely accused his father just to advance the ill-feeling of her uncle. 15. the conviction of Mahinay by the trial court is correct. intimidation or threat Facts: 1. executed an extra-judicial confession wherein he narrated in detail how he raped and killed the victim. violence.Mahinay 01 February 1999. Gen. 7. on 25 June 1995 to buy lugaw. Victoria Chan was 12 year old girl who was Isip sneighbor. 2..reasonable doubt exist as to his guilt Issue: Is he guilty of rape? Held: yes. Victoria s mother. y The TC was also wrong on awarding P 100 000 as actual damage and moral damages because the prosecution failed to present any evidence regarding actual damages.Mahinay was charged with rape with homicide. People vs. However. Mahinay s underwear. On appeal. 13. Testimony of Norgina Rivera. The positive assertions of his daughter that he raped her are given a greater weight. Batangas. Mahinay joined Gregorio Rivera in a drinking spree. The purpose of the rule is ti enable the accused to prepare his defense. At the second floor of the house under construction. Mahinay was arrested in Barangay ObarioMatala. y The penalty should be reclusion perpetua.. Upon automatic appeal to the Supreme Court. P25k as exemplary damages for each raped and P50k as civil indemnity for each count of rape. in people v Garcia . It was also found that she had traumatic head injury and lacerations on her hymen. noticed her daughter was missing 5.m. leather wallet. 25 June 1995 .m. Rationale: y The contention of Romeo that the case filed against him were out of illfeeling will not stand. T. 8. She said that it was unlikely for Mahinay to just disappear from the apartment since whenever he would go out. 4. worried. 12. conviction may be had on circumstantial evidence provided that the following requisites concur: a. 10. He also reason the it was due to the ill-motive of his in-laws because he left his brother-in-law drunk during a fiesta in Bula 21. Isip informed SPO1 ArsenioNacis and SPO1 Arnold Alabastro were by that Larry Mahinay was missing. 26 June 1995 a certain Boy found Victoria s body inside a septic tank in the compound. 6. Mahinay. SPO1 VirgilioVillano retrieved the Victoria's underwear from the septic tank. The trial court found Romeo Arillas guilty 22. in deep thought and walking in a zigzag manner when he came to her store at 9:00 p.Minalabac. It was found that Victoria died of asphyxiation by manual strangulation. y TC imposed the penalty of death because Amor was under 18 yrs old at the time of the commission of the crime. Issue: Is the conviction of Mahinay by the trial court correct? Held: Yes. y The Trial Court is correct in convicting him but they were wrong on sentencing him to death. Around 10 a. 9. y It is the fundamental rule that every element of an offense must be alleged in the complaint. He was in charge of taking care of Isip s house which was under construction adjacent to her old residence situated inside a compound at No. Romeo contends that even if his defense is merely denial and alibi. But he stayed and slept in an apartment also owned by Isip. the combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt 2.m. 10 July 1995 . sister-in-law of Isip. 14. pair of dirty long pants and pliers were found in the yard three arms length away from the septic tank. he would normally return on the same day or early morning of the following day. who was already drunk. 07 July 1995 Mahinay. 1. located 10 meters away from the unfinished house. Mahinay argues that the circumstantial evidence to prove his guilt are insufficient to prove his guilt and his confession was acquired because he was threatened that he would be salvaged . Camarines Sur. Metro Manila. .at 8 a. that Mahinay was uneasy. Mahinay was convicted and sentenced to death. Ibaan. Valenzuela . 4165 Dian Street. Aside from the fact that he failed to prove this. 20 November 1993 Larry Mahinay started working as a houseboy to Maria Isip. 25 June 1995 Elvira Chan. Ma. Circumstantial evidence: a. with the assistance of Atty. Romeo Arillas was not able to prove that it was physically impossible for him to be at the commission of the crime as he was just in the rice field. Victoria s clothes were retrieved.
indemnity increased from P50. 15. 10. 2. violence. Eduardo held Catalina s legs b. a passenger jeepney driver. When by reason or on occasion of the rape. 3. the penalty shall be death (Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). 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. 1994 (10pm) Catalina (15) and her two friends (male) went to a dance party 11pm they were going home On the way home they stopped to rest on a shed beside the school AgapitoQuinanola (member of the PNP) and Eduardo Escudero suddenly appeared with a gun Agapito forcibly took Catalina pointing the gun at her Eduardo took the 2 boys. Facts: 1. a. He testified that he was sleeping in the second floor of the unfinished house when Zaldy. But the doctor said that the hymen was not broken and that the diameter of her orifice was too small to preclude complete penetration of an average-size adult penis in erection without producing laceration Agapito claims that he was in Naga with his wife fixing the house Eduardo contends that a. 6. They took turns in raping her Catalina felt the penis in her organ Agapito and Eduardo left and Catalina ran home Catalina s mom and sister found out and told told Guillermo (Catalina s brother-in-law) They reported the incident to the police Catalina was examined by the doctor a. May 5. Suni that he met Mahinay between 6-7 p.000 to P75. h. but the two boys were able to escape Agapito and Eduardo tricked Catalina into going at the back of the school Agapito with the aid of Eduardo raped Catalina a. 7. Agapito inserted his penis in Catalina s organ c. as amended by R. Catalina made up the story due to her in-law s grudges against him b.000 moral damages. a high ranking police officer or the lady reporter who interviewed him if he was truly not guilty. If a woman over 12 years old was raped. 4. Held: 1. that Mahinay was one of his passengers on June 26. she has to prove: a. 8. Mahinay s testimony in court is incredible. Victoria s personal belongings were found in the unfinished big house of Isip where Mahinay slept on the night of the incident f. Mahinay gave his confession willingly. a homicide is committed. 3. Testimony of Sgt. WON the Catalina s Credibility is doubtful? WON the court erred in declaring them guilty of frustrated rape? NO. Force and violence was proven by the wounds. d. the absence of a free consent is presumed when the woman is below such age 5. Issue: 1. proof of force and consent becomes immaterial because: a. intimidation or threat 4. 12. Mahinay would have professed his innocence to Col. g. causing her to hit her head on the table and become unconscious after which he raped her. and undergo all the trouble and inconvenience not to mention the trauma and People v. 2. He went fishing that day and then went on a drinking spree till midnight RTC: Guilty of Frustrated Rape 9. 6. contusions and abrasions found on the victim s body and Mahinay s account that he pushed Victoria. 14.b. 16. 7. on 25 June 1995 while walking to his in-laws which is about 50 to 75 meters away to the unfinished big house of Isip and that he saw Maria Victoria Chan standing at the gate of the unfinished big house of Maria Isip between 8:00 and 9:00 in the same evening c. there was sexual intercourse b.A. 11. 5. Maganto. the rape was done through force.m. Roberto G. force is not an element of statutory rape b. Quinanola May 5. Testimony of Isip that Mahinay left on the morning of 25 June 1995 and did not come back until he was arrested. Sexual intercourse was proven by the examination of the doctor and extra-judicial confession of Mahinay. There was no evidence of maltreatment and he was apprised of his rights by the assisting counsel in Tagalog. 1995 at 2:00 early morning and alighted on top of the overpass of the North Expressway e. a co-worker and Boyet arrived in his house carrying the corpse of Victoria and that they threatened him with a knife to rape the dead body of Victoria but he refused. Testimony of Fernando Trinidad. 13. If a woman under 12 years old was raped.000 plus P50. 7659) Conviction affirmed. 1999 < Partial penetration is as good as full penetration > <Presumption is barrio lass won t lie about being raped> .
d. Yes a. b. . Carnal knowledge need not require the vagina be penetrated or the hymen to rupture. The crime of rape is consummated the moment the penis enters the labia or the lips of the female organ or merely touching of the external genetalia by the penis. Orita there is no such crime of frustrated rape. c. f. Partial penetration is as good as full penetration. The court finds no reason for Catalina to lie. e. 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. As declared in People v. 2. The medical examination merely stated that the smallness of the vaginal orifice only precludes COMPLETE penetration. A broken hymen is not a requirement in fact sometimes women get pregnant without it getting broken.b. for the wicked acts committed against her. This does not mean that rape has not been committed.