Ponce, Khenny Marie A.

Legal Medicine Case Digests

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. EDUARDO CANASTRE, Defendant-Appellant.

G.R. No. L-2055 December 24, 1948

Facts:

At about one o'clock in the morning of June 28, 1946, the appellant, Eduardo Canastre and Gil Sayuco,
together with two unidentified companions, came to the house of Magdaleno Beri in barrio Batuan,
municipality of Pototan, Province of Iloilo. When Magdaleno inquired of the identities of the intruders,
appellant pointed his gun to Magdaleno with the warning for him and his companions not to move and
with the threat of death if they did otherwise. After tying Magdaleno to the wall, the appellant entered
the room of Benedicta Beri, a 17-year old daughter of Magdaleno. With the aid of Gil Sayuco, Eduardo
brought her downstairs under a mango tree. Notwithstanding the girl's cries for help, her father and
mother could not come to her rescue, the first being then tied to the wall and the second having been
pushed away whenever she attempted to intervene. In spite of Benedicta's resistance, the appellant, with
the help of his three companions, was able to have sexual intercourse with Benedicta. Gil Sayuco then
took his turn in raping the girl, followed in succession by the other two companions. Not contended with
merely satisfying their lust, the appellant, Gil Sayuco and another companion returned to the house and
took away a rice bowl, some rice and four chickens, all worth about fifteen pesos. Eduardo Canastre and
Gil Sayuco were found guilty of robbery with rape by the RTC of Iloilo.

Aside from alleging that the appellant did not leave his house during the night of June 28, 1946, because
he had diarrhea, his counsel contends that he is at least entitled to the benefit of a reasonable doubt, in
view of the failure of the witness for the prosecution to identify the other two companions of the appellant
and Gil Sayuco - which led to the acquittal of co-accused Francisco Pasaporte and Gonzalo Fabilona.

Issue:

Whether or not Eduardo Canastre is guilty of rape.

Ruling:

The Court held in the affirmative. It held that the defense of alibi cannot prosper in the face of the positive
identification of the appellant by the prosecution witnesses who had not been shown to have any reason
for falsely imputing to the appellant so grave a crime as that of which he was convicted. Considering that
the night was clear and the appellant used his flashlight, no mistake could have been made in his indentity,
especially in view of the fact that he was personally known to them.
Ponce, Khenny Marie A.
Legal Medicine Case Digests

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CATALINO OSCAR, defendant-appellant
G.R. No. L-24055 December 28, 1925

Facts:

The defendant was charged in the Court of First Instance of Abra of the crime of rape. The trial court found
the defendant guilty of the crime of frustrated rape without any qualifying circumstance and sentenced
hi to either years and one day of presidio mayor with the accessory penalties and to pay the costs. From
the sentence the defendant appeals. The lower court found that the crime was frustrated, and not
consummated, on the ground that the evidence did not clearly show that the defendant's genital organ
was introduced to its full length into that of the offended party, and that there were no signs of emission
of semen.

Issue:

Whether or not the crime of rape was consummated.

Ruling:

Yes. The Supreme Court held that perfect penetration is not essential. Any penetration of female body by
the male organ is sufficient. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ, merely without rapture of the
hymen or laceration of the vagina, is sufficient to warrant conviction. In the present case, the physician,
who examined the offended party shortly after the commission of the crime, testifies that he hymen was
lacerated and that there was coagulated blood, though he found no semen. This shows sufficiently that
the crime was consummated, and the sentence of the court below must be modified accordingly.
Ponce, Khenny Marie A.
Legal Medicine Case Digests

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JERRY FERRER Y MOLINA @ "Jerry Rugby", accused-
appellant.

G.R. No. 142662 August 14, 2001

Facts:

An Information for rape was filed with the Regional Trial Court of Makati, charging Jerry Ferrer y Molina
alias "Jerry Rugby" as follows:

"That on or about the 21st day of August, 1998, in the City of Makati, Metro Manila, Philippines, a place
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, armed with a bladed weapon,
by means of force, violence and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have
carnal knowledge of the complainant CATHERINE VICENTE Y RANCE, without her consent and against her
will."

Accused denied the allegations but the trial court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
rape.

In his appeal, accused-appellant contends that the test of moral certainty or standard of proof beyond
reasonable doubt required for conviction in criminal cases has not been satisfactorily attained in the case
at bar. Accused-appellant argues that the victim's claim that she was dragged a few meters before forcing
her to lie in the "talahiban" where she was raped is belied by the medico-legal report of the examining
physician which stated that "no evident sign of extra-genital physical injuries were noted on the body of
the subject at the time of the examination."

Issue:

Whether or not the trial court erred in finding the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

Ruling:

No, the Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s decision. It held that the absence of external signs of
physical injuries does not negate rape. It is settled that laceration is not an element of the crime of rape.
The absence of lacerations does not negate rape. The presence of lacerations in the victim's vagina is not
necessary to prove rape; neither is a broken hymen an essential element of the crime. The presence sperm
is not a requisite for rape. For in rape, it is not ejaculation but penetration that consummates the sexual
act.
There is no reason why accused-appellant may not be convicted solely on the testimony of the victim
herself. Settled is the rule that when a woman declares that she has been raped, and where her testimony
passes the test of credibility, the accused can be convicted on the basis thereof. This is because, from the
nature of the offense, the sole evidence that can usually be offered to establish the guilt of the accused is
the complainant's testimony.
Bare denial of the accused cannot overcome the categorical and credible testimony of the victim that she
was raped by the accused.
Ponce, Khenny Marie A.
Legal Medicine Case Digests

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CEILITO ORITA alias "Lito," defendant-appellant.

G.R. No. 88724 April 3, 1990

Facts:

Complainant Cristina S. Abayan was a 19-year old freshman student at the St. Joseph's College at
Borongan, Eastern Samar. Appellant was a Philippine Constabulary (PC) soldier.
In the early morning of March 20, 1983, complainant arrived at her boarding house. Her classmates had
just brought her home from a party. All of a sudden, somebody held her and poked a knife to her neck.
She then recognized appellant who was a frequent visitor of another boarder. She pleaded with him to
release her, but he ordered her to go upstairs with him. When they reached the second floor, he
commanded her to look for a room. With the Batangas knife still poked to her neck, they entered
complainant's room. He ordered her to lie down on the floor and then mounted her. He made her hold
his penis and insert it in her vagina. She followed his order as he continued to poke the knife to her. At
said position, however, appellant could not fully penetrate her. Only a portion of his penis entered her as
she kept on moving.

Complainant was then able to escape.

The trial court convicted the accused of frustrated rape.

Issue:

Whether or not the conviction of frustrated rape is proper.

Ruling:

The Court held in the negative. The Court in its decision held that there is no crime of frustrated rape.
It held that in the crime of rape, from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim he
actually attains his purpose and, from that moment also all the essential elements of the offense have
been accomplished. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender, because he has performed the last
act necessary to produce the crime. Thus, the felony is consummated. Set is the uniform rule that for the
consummation of rape, perfect penetration is not essential. Any penetration of the female organ by the
male organ is sufficient. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ, without rupture of the hymen or
laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction. Necessarily, rape is attempted if there is no
penetration of the female organ because not all acts of execution was performed. The offender merely
commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts. Taking into account the nature, elements
and manner of execution of the crime of rape and jurisprudence on the matter, it is hardly conceivable
how the frustrated stage in rape can ever be committed.

After a thorough review of the records, the Court found the evidence sufficient to prove his guilt beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime of consummated rape.
Ponce, Khenny Marie A.
Legal Medicine Case Digests

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. LEO ECHEGARAY y PILO, accused-appellant.

G.R. No. 117472 June 25, 1996

Facts:

This is a case of rape by the father of his ten-year old daughter.

Sometime in the afternoon of April 1994, while Rodessa was looking after her three brothers in their
house as her mother attended a gambling session in another place, she heard her father, the accused-
appellant in this case, order her brothers to go out of the house. As soon as her brothers left, accused-
appellant Leo Echegaray approached Rodessa and suddenly dragged her inside the room. Before she could
question the appellant, the latter immediately, removed her panty and made her lie on the floor.
Thereafter, appellant likewise removed his underwear and immediately placed himself on top of Rodessa.
Subsequently, appellant forcefully inserted his penis into Rodessa's organ causing her to suffer intense
pain. While appellant was pumping on her, he even uttered. "Masarap ba, masarap ba?" and to which
Rodessa answered: "Tama na Papa, masakit". Rodessa's plea proved futile as appellant continued with his
act. The same sexual assault happened up to the fifth time and this usually took place when her mother
was out of the house. However, after the fifth time, Rodessa decided to inform her grandmother, Asuncion
Rivera, who in turn told Rosalie, Radessa's mother. Rodessa and her mother proceeded to the Barangay
Captain where Rodessa confided the sexual assaults she suffered. Thereafter, Rodessa was brought to the
precinct where she executed an affidavit.

On his part, the accused denied the accusation and contends that her daughter's complaint was forced
upon her by her grandma and the answers in the sworn statement of Rodessa were coached. That the
accusation of RAPE was motivated by Rodessa's grandmother's greed over the lot situated at the Madrigal
Estate-NHA Project, Barangay San Antonio, San Francisco del Monte, Quezon City. The accused-appellant
asserts that the extraordinary size of his penis could not have insinuated itself into the victim's vagina and
that the accused is not the real father of the said victim.

In finding the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape, the lower court
dismissed the defense of alibi and lent credence to the straightforward testimony of the ten-year old
victim to whom no ill motive to testify falsely against accused-appellant can be attributed.

Issue:

Whether or not the rape charge was merely concocted.

Ruling:

The Court held that it is a well-entrenched jurisprudential rule that the testimony of a rape victim is
credible where she has no motive to testify against the accused. Rodessa positively identified his father
accused-appellant, as the culprit of Statutory Rape. Her account of how the accused-appellant succeeded
in consummating his grievous and odious sexual assault on her is free from any substantial self-
contradiction. It is highly inconceivable that it is rehearsed and fabricated upon instructions from
Rodessa's maternal grandmother Asuncion Rivera as asserted by the accused-appellant. The Court found
Ponce, Khenny Marie A.
Legal Medicine Case Digests
no flaws material enough to discredit the testimony of the ten-year old Rodessa which the trial court
found convincing enough and unrebutted by the defense. After due deliberation, the Court found that the
trial judge's assessment of the credibility of the prosecution witnesses deserves our utmost respect in the
absence of arbitrariness.
In his testimony, the accused-appellant stated that he could not have raped Rodessa because of
the size of his penis which could have ruptured her vagina had he actually done so. In rape cases, a broken
hymen is not an essential element thereof. A mere knocking at the doors of the pudenda, so to speak, by
the accused's penis suffices to constitute the crime of rape as full entry into the victim's vagina is not
required to sustain a conviction.