ART.
266-A: RAPE
People v. Orita (April 3 1990 Medialdea, J.)
FACTS:
 Ceilito Orita allegedly raped 19-year old college freshman Cristina
Abayan. Orita was a PH Constabulary soldier at the time.
 Upon arriving at her boarding house after a party, Cristina was poked
with a knife to her neck. She recognized Orita who was a frequent visitor
of the boarding house.
o He ordered her to go upstairs with him. When they reached the
2nd floor, they entered her room.
o Orita pushed Cristina and she hit her head on the wall. Orita
undressed himself and ordered Cristina to take off her clothes.
Scared, she took off her shirt and he pulled off her underwear.
o He ordered her to lie down on the floor then he mounted her. He
made her hold his penis and insert it in her vagina. However, he
cannot fully penetrate her and only a portion of his penis entered
because she kept moving.
o He commanded her to mount him. Again, only a small part of his
penis entered her.
o Cristina was able to dash out to the next room and locked herself
inside. She was pursued by Orita but she jumped out thru a
window.
o She ran to the municipal building and policemen found her sitting
outside crying. One of them took off his jacket and wrapped it
around her. The policemen rushed to the boarding house and
saw somebody running away but was unable to apprehend him
due to darkness.
 According to the medical exam, Cristina had no abrasions or marks on
her vulva. Her hymen was also intact.
 The trial court convicted Orita of frustrated rape.
ISSUE: W/N Orita is guilty of consummated rape.
HELD: YES.
 NO CRIME OF FRUSTRATED RAPE.
 The alleged inconsistencies of the prosecution’s testimony were trivial
ones. They confirm that the witnesses’ testimonies were not rehearsed
and added credence and veracity to their spontaneous testimony.
 The SC upheld the factual findings of the TC.
 The SC held that according to the med exam, the abrasions in the left
and right knees, linear abrasions below the left breast, multiple pinpoint
marks, circumscribed hematoma at the anterior neck, erythematous area
surrounding the vaginal orifice and tender vulva, are conclusive proof of
struggle against force and violence exerted on the victim.
 Requisites of a Frustrated Felony: (1) that the offender has performed
all the acts of execution which would produce the felony and (2) that the
felony is not produced due to causes independent of the perpetrator's
will.
o Clearly, 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.
o In rape, perfect penetration is not essential. Any penetration
of the vagina by a penis is sufficient.
o *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.
 The med examiner did not rule out penetration of the vaguna. He merely
testified that there was uncertainty whether or not there was penetration.
However, Cristina positively testified that there was penetration albeit
partial.
People v. Campuhan (Mar 3 2000 Bellisillo, J.)
FACTS:
 Primo Campuhan was found guilty of statutory rape.
 Ma. Corazon Pamintuan, mother of 4-year old Crysthel Pamintuan
was preparing some Milo drinks for her 2 children. Primo was the helper
of Corazon’s brother Conrado.
o As Corazon was preparing the drinks, she heard one of her
daughters cry “Ayoko, ayoko!”
o She rushed upstairs and saw Primo inside her children’s room
kneeling before Crysthel. Chrysthel’s pajamas and panty were
removed, and Primo’s shorts were down to his knees.
o According to Corazon, Primo was forcing his penis into
Crysthel’s vagina.
o Corazon cursed at Primo and boxed him several times. He
evaded her, pulled up his pants, and ran. Corazon shouted for
help and her brother, a cousin, and an uncle chased Primo, took
him to the back of their compound and called the barangay
officials.
 According to the physical exam, Crysthel had no signs of extra-genital
injury.
 Primo asserts that the rape was impossible because Crysthel’s younger
sister was in the room with them and their mother was only downstairs.
The door of the room was also open.
 o He also avers that it was almost inconceivable that Corazon
could give such a vivid description of the alleged sexual contact
when from where she stood she could not have possibly seen
the alleged touching of the sexual organs of the accused and his
victim.
ISSUE: W/N Campuhan is guilty of consummated rape.
HELD: NO.
 The SC clarified that even of the mere touching of the external genitalia
by the penis constitutes consummated rape, the act of touching should
be understood as part of the entry of the penis into the labias of the
female organ and not mere touching alone of the mons pubis or the
pudendum.
o Touching when applied to rape cases does not simply mean
mere epidermal contact, stroking or grazing of organs, a slight
brush or a scrape of the penis on the external layer of the
victim’s vagina, or the mons pubis.
o The touching must be beneath the mons pubis or the vaginal
surface to be considered consummated.
o The grazing or touching of the mons pubis of the pudendum is
merely attempted rape or acts of lasciviousness.
 The SC held that the prosecution failed to prove that Primo’s penis was
able to penetrate Crysthel’s vagina, even slightly.
o Primo’s kneeling position rendered it impossible for him to pin
down Crysthel, spread her legs, and hold his penis as Corazon
testified.
 Rape is attempted when the offender commences the commission of
rape directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution
which should produce the crime of rape by reason of some cause or
accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.
o All elements of attempted rape are present in the case.
People v. Mahinay (Feb 1 1999 Per Curiam)
FACTS:
 Larry Mahinay worked as a houseboy of Maria Isip. He was tasked with
taking care of her unfinished house.
 Victim Ma. Victoria Chan (12) was Isip’s neighbor who always passed
the latter’s house on her way to school and played inside the compound
yard. Mahinay was always around. Inside the compound yard was a
septic tank.
 On the morning of the crime, Mahinay and one Gregorio Rivera were on
a drinking spree. Drunk, Mahinay left and asked permission from Isip to
go out with his friends.
 That night, Mahinay went to Norgina Rivera’s store to buy lugaw. She
told him there was none left. She noticed that he was uneasy, his hair
was disarrayed, and he was drunk and walking in a dazed manner. He
went back to the compound.
 Ma. Victoria’s mother Elvira Chan noticed that she was missing.
 Isip noticed that Mahinay failed to show up for dinner. The following day,
Mahinay boarded a jeepney at the talipapa, alighted on the bridge of the
North Expressway and disappeared.
 A boy found Ma. Victoria’s lifeless body inside the septic tank.
 According to the autopsy, the victim had contusions on her supra pubic
area and died of asphyxiation. Her hymen had lacerations.
 The police found the victim’s clothes in the 2nd floor of the unfinished
house. They also found underwear by the septic tank, and a wallet and
pants identified by Isip as Mahinay’s belongings.
 Mahinay was finally arrested in Batangas. He executed an extrajudicial
confession wherein he narrated how he raped and killed the victim. He
also pointed to Zaldy and Boyet as his co-conspirators.
 Mahinay insists that the circumstantial evidence presented by the
prosecution against him is insufficient to prove his guilt beyond
reasonable doubt.
ISSUE: W/N Mahinay is guilty of rape.
HELD: YES.
 Absence of direct proof does not necessarily absolve the accused from
any liability because conviction may be had on circumstantial evidence
provided that the following requisites concur:
1. there is more than one circumstance;
2. the facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
3. the combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a
conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
 For circumstantial evidence to be sufficient to support a conviction, all
circumstances must be consistent with each other, consistent with the
hypothesis that the accused is guilty, and at the same time inconsistent
with the hypothesis that he is innocent and with every other rational
hypothesis except that of guilt.
 There is no showing that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses
were fabricated or there was any reason for them to testify falsely against
the accused.
 From the victim’s wounds, force was indeed employed upon her to
satisfy carnal lust.
o Furthermore, Mahinay admitted that he pushed her causing her
to hit her head on the table and lose consciousness. Considering
that the victim was unconscious, it could safely be concluded
that she did not give free consent to her defilement.
People v. Fabro (Dec 13 1994 Puno, J.)
FACTS:
 Victim Rebecca Seguancia was working for Reyval Lopez as one of his
maids. Among her co-workers was Janet Fabro, accused Mario Fabro’s
wife.
 The incident began when Lopez asked Rebeccato buy band-aids. She
passed an ihaw-ihaw restaurant where she saw Fabro. He began to trail
her. She asked him to stop but he did not.
o Finding the store already closed, Rebecca headed back home.
Fabro suggested they go to his cousin to buy the band-aids but
she ignored him.
o Suddenly, Fabro grabbed Rebbeca’s left hand and dragged her
to a deserted area. He kissed her, but she bit his had. She tried
to escape but he grabbed her. He wrapped his hands around her
neck and she lost consciousness.
o Rebecca heard a gunshot and she rose to consciousness. She
found herself lying on the ground with appellant beside her,
zipping up his pants. Her back and vagina hurt, and she had a
sticky matter on her vagina. She also had no pants. Fabro fled
when a good Samaritan arrived.
 According to the medical certificate, Rebecca had no vaginal or hymenal
lacerations. The sticky matter also tested negative for spermatozoa.
ISSUE: W/N Fabro is guilty of rape.
HELD: YES.
 Requisites of Rape: (1) that the accused had carnal knowledge of the
offended party, (2) that coitus was done through the use of force or
intimidation.
 The SC has held in previous cases that when sexual assault is
committed against an unconscious victim, she would not be able to
testify on the actual act of sexual intercourse. It is precisely when the
sexual intercourse is performed when the victim is unconscious that the
act constitutes the offense of rape.
 Even if the victim had no vaginal or hymenal lacerations or spermatozoa,
neither complete penetration nor ejaculation is necessary to constitute
rape. What is essential is that there be penetration of the female
organ, no matter how slight.
People v. Echegaray
People v. Silvano (Jun 29 1999 Per Curiam)
FACTS:
 David Silvano allegedly raped his 16-year old daughter Sheryl Silvano.
 Sheryl was sleeping in her room and was awakened by David. He started
scolding her for coming in later. He appeared tipsy, and started
undressing Sheryl as a form of punishment that she had been
experiencing since she was 13.
o He started to hold and kiss her breasts. He dragged her at the
edge of the bed, knelt down on the from and held her privates.
o Sheryl pleaded him to stop but he removed her shorts and
panties, and raped her. Sheryl tried to free herself by pushing
David’s shoulders with her feet but he held her legs and placed
them between his arms.
o Sheryl felt a sticky liquid from David’s privates. He got a tissue
and wiped it.
 Sheryl could not longer bear the sexual abuse and left their house. She
stayed at her maternal grandmother’s house and confided to her
grandmother and her mother why she did not want to go back to her
house.
ISSUE: W/N David is guilty of rape.
HELD: YES.
 3 Principles in the Review of Rape Cases:
a.) An accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove
but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove;
b.) In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape, where only two
persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant is
scrutinized with extreme caution; and
c.) The evidence of the prosecution stands or falls on its own merits and
cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the defense.
 Sheryl’s claim was corroborated by the medical findings of the physician
who examined her.
o Her hymen had deep healed lacerations.
o She was not a virgin.
 The absence of fresh lacerations does not disprove rape.
 Appellant claims that the victim only offered a token of resistance.
o The law does not impose upon a rape victim the burden of
proving resistance. Moreover, physical resistance need not be
established in rape when intimidation is exercised upon the
victim and she submits herself against her will to the rapist's lust
because of fear for her life or personal safety.
o David’s moral ascendancy over Sheryl substitutes for violence or
intimidation.
o Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of
intimidation by which a man keeps a woman in a state of fear
and humiliation.
 The failure of the victim to immediately reveal her father’s incestuous
acts is not indicative of fabricated charges. It should be noted that many
victims of rape never complain or file criminal charges against their
rapists. They prefer to bear the ignominy and pain rather than reveal their
shame to the world or risk rapists making good their threats to kill or hurt
their victims.
o It is not uncommon for a young girl at such age to be intimidated
into silence and conceal for sometime the violation of her honor,
even by the mildest threat against her life.
People v. Bonaagua (Jun 6 2011 Peralta, J.)
FACTS:
 Ireno Bonaagua was charged with 4 counts of Rape for inserting his
tongue and his finger into the genital of his minor daughter AAA.
 It was established that AAA and her parents were staying in the house of
a Lola Jean for Christmas.
o AAA was inside a room lying in bed while her younger brothers
were playing outside. Ireno approached her, rolled her shirt
upward, and removed her shorts and panty.
o She tried to resist by putting her clothes back on but her father’s
strength prevailed. He touched her breasts and licked her
genitalia and then inserted his finger into it.
o In the evening of the same day, Ireno again raped AAA in the
same manner. AAA did not tell her mother because Ireno
threatened to kill her mother.
o AAA was raped for a 3rd time in Dec 1999.
o In Dec 2000, AAA and her mother spent Christmas with Ireno in
Las Pinas, where AAA was again raped for the 4th and 5th time.
o On Jan 2001, AAA complained of severe abdominal pain and her
mother took her to the hospital. The physical exam revealed that
AAA had healed superficial lacerations on her hymen. AAA then
revealed to her mother what happened.
ISSUE: W/N Ireno is guilty of rape.
HELD: YES.
 3 Principles in the Review of Rape Cases:
a.) An accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove
but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove;
b.) In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape, where only two
persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant is
scrutinized with extreme caution; and
c.) The evidence of the prosecution stands or falls on its own merits and
cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the defense.
 when the offended parties are young and immature girls, as in this case,
courts are inclined to lend credence to their version of what transpired,
considering not only their relative vulnerability, but also the shame and
embarrassment to which they would be exposed if the matter about
which they testified were not true.
 The lone testimony of the victim in a rape case, if credible, is enough to
sustain a conviction.
 Rape is no longer a crime against chastity but a crime against
persons.
o Appellant’s Affidavit of Desistance will not prosper.
o It is no longer a private crime which cannot be prosecuted,
except upon a complaint filed by the aggrieved party. Hence,
pardon by the offended party of the offender in the crime of rape
will not extinguish the offender’s criminal liability.
o To justify the dismissal of the complaints, the pardon should
have been made prior to the institution of the criminal actions.
People v. Jumawan (Apr 21 2014 Reyes, J.)
FACTS:
 Edgar Jumawan and his wife KKK were married, had 4 children, and
put up several businesses.
 KKK filed a complaint alleging Edgar raped her and boxed her shoulder
for refusing to have sex with him.
 According to the prosecution, KKK met Edgar on her parents’ farm where
Edgar’s father was one of the laborers. They got married a year after.
o After the birth of their 1st child, they put up a sari-sari store and
later on engaged in several other businesses.
o KKK managed the businesses while Edgard supervised the rice
mill but in reality he only occasionally drove one of the trucks.
o KKK and Edgard started quarrelling usually upon his complaint
that she failed to attend to him. She was preoccupied with
financial problems and he says that "a woman must stay in the
house and only good in bed.”
 On the day of the crime, the family went about their nightly routine.
o KKK rested separately in a cot in their conjugal bedroom. Edgar
asked her why she was lying there and she said that she had a
headache and abdominal pain because of her upcoming
menstruation.
o Edgar got angry and threw the cot against the wall causing KKK
to fall. KKK transferred to the bed.
o Edgar then expressed his desire for sex by tapping his fingers on
her lap. She politely declined but Edgar tried to pull down her
panties. She resisted and refused to bend her legs. Edgar
stretched her legs apart and succeeded in penetrating her.
o Their daughter MMM heard KKK’s pleas and woke up. MMM
knocked on the bedroom then eventually kicked it open. Upon
seeing her mother crying she helped her get up and brought her
to the girls’ bedroom. However, Edgar blocked the door. MMM
leaned against the door and embraced KKK as they pushed their
way out.
o Edgar’s aggression recurred the following night. KKK decided to
sleep in her daughters’ room but Edgar lifted her from the bed
and attempted to carry her to their room.
o Edgar was not pacified even in the presence of his children and
ordered them to leave. Their daughters obliged and heard the
pleas of their mother resonate with the creaking bed.
ISSUE: W/N Edgar is guilty of rape.
HELD: YES.
 The court found that there is no rational basis for distinguishing between
marital rape and nonmarital rape.
 The Supreme Court held that husbands do not have property rights over
their wives’ bodies. Sexual intercourse, albeit within the realm of
marriage, if not consensual, is rape.
 Violation of equal protection clause
o The Court ruled that to treat marital rape cases differently from
non-marital rape cases in terms of the elements that constitute
the crime and in the rules for their proof, infringes on the equal
protection clause.
o The Court found that there is no rational basis for distinguishing
between marital rape and non-marital rape. The various
rationales which have been asserted in defense of the exemption
are either based upon archaic notions about the consent and
property rights incident to marriage or are simply unable to
withstand even the slightest scrutiny.
o The Court declared the marital exemption for rape in the New
York statute to be unconstitutional.
o Said exemption states that a husband was endowed with
absolute immunity from prosecution for the rape of his wife. The
privilege was personal and pertained to him alone. He had the
marital right to rape his wife but he will be liable when he aids or
abets another person in raping her.
o Moreover, Section 1 of RA 8353 penalizes the crime without
regard to the rapist’s legal relationship with his victim.
 Implied consent theory untenable
o The Court also ruled against the application of implied consent
theory which was raised by the accused. The accused argued
that consent to copulation is presumed between cohabiting
husband and wife unless the contrary is proved.
o According to the Court, it is now acknowledged that rape, as a
form of sexual violence, exists within marriage. A man who
penetrates her wife without her consent or against her will
commits sexual violence upon her, and the Philippines, as a
State Party to the CEDAW and its accompanying Declaration,
defines and penalizes the act as rape under R.A. No. 8353.