MLLEGASPI.

2018

ADELMO PEREZ (petitioner) v CA and People of the Philippines (respondent)
GR No. 143838 KAPUNANMay 9, 2002

DOCTRINE: Difference of frustrated rape and acts of lasciviousness
NATURE: Petition for review on certiorari on previous Courts decision affirming conviction of Perez for crime of
attempted rape
FACTS:
On April 14, 1988, Perez entered the room of Julita Tria (victim) and embraced and kissed her on the neck,
held and mashed her breast, and compelled her to lie down, and thereafter kissed her lips and neck and
with the intent of having sex with her, touched her sex organ and tried to remove her panties thereby
commissioning the crime of rape directly by overt acts but did not accomplish having sex with her because
Julita Tria succeeded in resisting his attempt and also because victims mother arrived.
Trial court rendered the judgment finding the Perez guilty of attempted rape. This decision was reaffirmed
by the CA.
ISSUE: W/N crime committed was attempted rape?
HELD: NO. The SC held that the crime committed, though obscene and detestable acts, do not constitute attempted
rape absent any showing that petitioner actually commenced to force his penis into complainants sexual organ.
RATIO:
Under Article 6 of the RPC, there is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by
overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause
or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. In the crime of rape, penetration is an essential act of
execution to produce the felony. Thus, for there to be an attempted rape, the accused must have commenced the
act of penetrating his sexual organ to the vagina of the victim but for some cause or accident other than his own
spontaneous desistance, the penetration, however slight, is not completed.

In the case at bar, there is no showing that petitioners sexual organ had even touched complainants vagina nor any
part of her body. All the elements of acts of lasciviousness were also satisfied- (1) that the offender commits
any act of lasciviousness or lewdness; (2) that it is done (a) by using force and intimidation or (b) when the offended
party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or (c) when the offended party is under 12 years of age; and
(3) that the offended party is another person of either sex.

Although the information filed was for attempted rape, he can be convicted of acts of lasciviousness because the said
crime is included in rape.

RULING: Perez is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of crime of acts of lasciviousness.