Malto vs.

People

G.R. No. 164733

CORONA, J

Sep 21, 2007

In the case of Malto v. People, a professor is convicted for inducing and

seducing his minor student to engage in sexual intercourse, leading to a
proper conviction under Section 5(a) of RA 7610, with a modified penalty and
adjusted damages.

Facts:
 Petitioner Michael John Z. Malto was charged with violation of Section 5(a), Article III
of Republic Act (RA) 7610, as amended.
 The original information accused Malto of violating Section 5(b), but it was subsequently
amended to Section 5(a).
 The prosecution presented evidence that Malto, a professor, induced and seduced his
student, a minor, to engage in sexual intercourse and lascivious conduct.
 The trial court found Malto guilty and sentenced him to reclusion temporal.
 The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty.

Issue:
 Whether the conviction of Malto for violation of Section 5(a), Article III of RA 7610, as
amended, is proper.

Ruling:
 The conviction of Malto for violation of Section 5(a), Article III of RA 7610, as
amended, is proper.

Ratio:
 The designation of the offense in the information against Malto was changed from
Section 5(b) to Section 5(a) of RA 7610. However, the actual facts stated in the
information support a charge for violation of Section 5(a).
 The offense of violation of Section 5(a) pertains to acts of inducing, seducing, or taking
advantage of influence or relationship to procure a child to engage in sexual intercourse
or lascivious conduct.
 The elements of the offense were present in this case: Malto committed lascivious
conduct and had sexual intercourse with the minor victim, who was below 18 years old.
 The offense of violation of Section 5(a) is separate and distinct from rape. Malto can be
held liable for violation of Section 5(a) even if he did not commit rape.
 In cases involving violation of Section 5(a) of RA 7610, the consent of the child is
immaterial. A child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse cannot
validly give consent to sexual intercourse.
 Malto may enjoy the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, with a maximum term
of 20 years and a minimum term of 14 years and 8 months.
 The award of damages should be modified. Civil indemnity of P50,000 is proper, but the
grant of moral and exemplary damages is unwarranted.