Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Article 246. Parricide. Any person who shall kill his father, mother,
or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, 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.
ELEMENTS:
1. person is killed
2. deceased killed by the accused
3. deceased is the:
a. father
b. mother Whether legitimate/illegitimate
c. child
should not be less than 3 days old because if
so, guilty of infanticide
d. Legitimate other ascendant
e. Legitimate other descendant
f. Legitimate spouse
best proof: marriage certificate or testimony of
the accused that he is married to the
deceased
Essential element: relationship of the offender with the victim; only
relatives by blood and in direct line, except spousethus, adopted
NOT included!
Note: According to sir, an adopted child is considered a legitimate
child so pwede. However, the parents of the adopter is not included
since according to family law, the relationship is exclusive between
the adopter and adopted.
relationship MUST be ALLEGED! If not, then, cannot be
convicted of parricide but only of murder and relationship will be
considered only as an aggravating circumstance.
there is parricide through reckless imprudence if accused had no
intent to kill anyone.
discovery, escape, pursuit and the killing must all form part of
one continuous act
3. accused did not promote or facilitate the prostitution of his
wife/daughter or not consented to the infidelity of the other
spouse
Note: Apparently this article is not based on any moral consideration
but more of the concept of ownership. As in, you own your
spouse/daughter, therefore no one else can use them without your
permission.
this article does not define or penalize a felony!
Thus, the requisites must be established by the evidence of the
defense so as be to punished only of destierro
accused cannot enter into a conditional plea of guilty and be
sentenced with destierro since accused will be charged with
paricide/homicide or serious physical injuries.
killing must be the direct by-product of the accuseds rage;
actually motivated by blind impulse and not be influences by some
external factor.
reason of the killing must be: for having surprised her in the act of
sexual intercourse with another person
Note: passion and obfuscation is only a mitigating circumstance unlike
in the US where temporary insanity is absolutory.
NO CRIMINAL LIABILITY IF: only inflicted less serious or slight
physical injuries or when inflicted to a 3rd person caught in the
crossfire because accused was not committing murder but inflicting
death under exceptional circumstances.
Banishment not intended as penalty but to protect the killer
spouse from the acts of reprisals by relatives of the deceased.
WHEN PARRICIDE NOT PUNISHED WITH
PERPETUA TO DEATH:
1. Parricide committed through negligence
2. committed by mistake
RECLUSION
ELEMENTS:
1. person was killed
person must be killed to consummate the crime. If victim
not killed, only attempted or frustrated homicide
there must be satisfactory evidence of the fact of death
and the identity of the victim
2. accused killed him without any justifying circumstance
3. accused had the intention to kill, which is presumed
4. killings was not attended by any of the qualifying
circumstances of murder, or by that of parricide or
infanticide
intent to kill- presumed when death resulted! Thus, when
death resulted, even if there is no intent to kill, the crime is
homicide
- needed only for attempted/frustrated stages because if
intent not proven beyond reasonable doubt then only
liable for physical injuries!
- Thus, no offense for frustrated homicide through
imprudence. Element of intent to kill in frustrated
homicide is incompatible with negligence or
imprudence.
- Sometimes shown by the kind of weapon; parts of the
victims body at which the weapon was aimed.
killing must NOT be justified
in the absence of clear proof of any circumstances that would
qualify as murder the killing of the deceased, the guilty person
should be sentenced only for homicide.
wounds that caused death were inflicted by 2 different
persons, even if they were not in conspiracy, each one of
them is guilty of homicide. BUT if can be shown that the
wound inflicted by him did not cause the death of the victim,
then, he will not be punished for homicide this is applicable
ELEMENTS:
1. pregnant woman
2. violence is exerted, or drugs or beverages administered,
or accused acts upon such pregnant woman
3. fetus dies, either in womb or after having been expelled
4. abortion is intended
WAYS OF COMMITTING INTENTIONAL ABORTION:
1. using violence upon the person of the pregnant woman
2. acting, without violence, without the consent of he woman
(administering drugs or beverages upon such pregnant woman
without her consent)
3. acting with the consent of the pregnant woman
ABORTION vs. INFANTICIDE
ABORTION
INFANTICIDE
Fetus
could
not
sustain Fetus
could
sustain
an
independent life.
independent life after separation
No legal viability.
from the mothers womb
Article 257. Unintentional abortion. The penalty of prision
correccional in its minimum and medium period shall be imposed
*qualifying circumstance:[+fine]:
1. there is manifest intent to insult or
offend the injured
Article 265. Less serious physical injuries. Any person who shall inflict upon another physical injuries not described in the
preceding articles, but which shall incapacitate the offended party for labor for ten days or more, or shall require medical assistance
for the same period, shall be guilty of less serious physical injuries and shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor.
Whenever less serious physical injuries shall have been inflicted with the manifest intent to kill or offend the injured person, or
under circumstances adding ignominy to the offense in addition to the penalty of arresto mayor, a fine not exceeding 500 pesos shall
be imposed.
Any less serious physical injuries inflicted upon the offender's parents, ascendants, guardians, curators, teachers, or persons
of rank, or persons in authority, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, provided that, in the
case of persons in authority, the deed does not constitute the crime of assault upon such person.
Article 266. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment. The crime of slight physical injuries shall be punished:
1. By arresto menor when the offender has inflicted physical injuries which shall incapacitate the offended party for labor from
one to nine days, or shall require medical attendance during the same period.
2. By arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 20 pesos and censure when the offender has caused physical injuries which do
not prevent the offended party from engaging in his habitual work nor require medical assistance.
3. By arresto menor in its minimum period or a fine not exceeding 50 pesos when the offender shall ill-treat another by deed
without causing any injury.
supervening event converting the crime into serious physical injuries after the filing of the information for slight physical injuries
can still be subject of a new charge
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8049 (Hazing Law)
AN ACT REGULATING HAZING AND OTHER FORMS OF INITIATION RITES IN FRATERNITIES, SORORITIES, AND
ORGANIZATIONS AND PROVIDING PENALTIES THEREFOR
What is hazing?
An initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite for admission into membership in a fraternity, sorority or organization by
placing the recruit neophyte or applicant in some embarrassing or humiliating situations such as forcing him to do menial, silly,
foolish and similar tasks or activities or otherwise subjecting him to physical or psychological suffering or injury.
When will hazing be allowed?
When there is prior written notice to the school authorities or head of organization seven (7) days before the conduct of such
initiation. The written notice shall indicate the period of the initiation activities which shall not exceed three (3) days, shall include the
names of those to be subjected to such activities, and shall further contain an undertaking that no physical violence be employed by
anybody during such initiation rites. The head of the school or organization or their representatives must assign at least two (2)
representatives of the school or organization as the case may be, to be present during the initiation. It is the duty of such
representative to see to it that no physical harm of any kind shall be inflicted upon a recruit, neophyte or applicant.
When will the acts be punishable?
a) if death, rape, sodomy or mutilation results therefrom
b) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall become insane, imbecile, impotent or blind.
c) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or shall have
lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm or a leg or shall have lost the use of any such member shall have become incapacitated
for the activity or work in which he was habitually engaged.
d) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall become deformed or shall have lost any other part of his body, or shall have
lost the use thereof or shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance of the activity or work in which he was
habitually engaged for a period of more than ninety (90) days.
e) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance on the activity or work in
which he was habitually engaged for more than thirty (30) days.
f) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance of the activity or work in
which he was habitually engaged for ten (10) days or more, or that the injury sustained shall require medical attendance for the
same period.
g) if in consequence of the hazing the victim shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance of the activity or work in
which he was habitually engaged from one (1) to nine (9) days, or that the injury sustained shall require medical attendance for the
same period.
h) if in consequence of the hazing the victim sustained physical injuries which do not prevent him from engaging in his
habitual activity or work nor require medical attendance.
The maximum penalty herein provided shall be imposed in any of the following instances:
a) when the recruitment is accompanied by force, violence, threat, intimidation or deceit on the person of the recruit who
refuses to join;
b) when the recruit, neophyte or applicant initially consents to join but upon learning that hazing will be committed on his
person, is prevented from quitting.
c) when the recruit neophyte or applicant having undergone hazing is prevented from reporting the unlawful act to his
parents or guardians, to the proper school authorities, or to the police authorities through force, violence , threat or intimidation;
d) when the hazing is committed outside of the school or institution;
e) when the victim is below twelve (12) years of age at the time of the hazing.
Who are liable?
1. the officer and members of the fraternity, sorority or organization who actually participated in the infliction of physical harm
shall be liable as principals
2. owner of the place where hazing is conducted shall be liable as an accomplice, when he has actual knowledge of the hazing
conducted therein but failed to take any action to prevent the same from occurring
3. If the hazing is held in the home of one of the officers or members of the fraternity, group, or organization, the parents shall
be held liable as principals when they have actual knowledge of the hazing conducted therein but failed to take any action to
prevent the same from occurring
4. school authorities including faculty members who consent to the hazing or who have actual knowledge thereof but failed to
take any action to prevent the same from occurring shall be punished as accomplices for the acts of hazing committed by
the perpetrators
5. officers, former officers, or alumni of the organization, group, fraternity, or sorority who actually planned the hazing
although not present when the acts constituting the hazing were committed shall be liable as principals
6. Officers or members of an organization, group, fraternity, or sorority who knowingly cooperated in carrying out the hazing
by inducing the victim to be present thereat shall be liable as principals
7. fraternity or sorority's adviser who is present when the acts constituting the hazing were committed and failed to take any
action to prevent the same from occurring shall be liable as principal
RAPE (RA 8353)
Article 266-A. Rape; When And How Committed. Rape is Committed
1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:
a) Through force, threat, or intimidation;
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and
d) When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances
mentioned above be present.
2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual
assault by inserting his penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of
another person.
Article 266-B. Penalties. Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.
Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be reclusion
perpetua to death.
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to
death.
When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion
perpetua to death.
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death.
The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following aggravating/qualifying
circumstances:
1) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative
by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim;
2) When the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law enforcement or penal institution:
3) When the rape is committed in full view of the spouse, parent, any of the children or other relatives within the third civil
degree of consanguinity;
4) When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation or calling and is personally known to be such by the
offender before or at the time of the commission of the crime;
5) When the victim is a child below seven (7) years old;
6) When the offender knows that he is afflicted with Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus (HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency
Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim;
7) When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or para-military units thereof or the Philippine
National Police or any law enforcement agency or penal institution, when the offender took advantage of his position to facilitate the
commission of the crime;
8) When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability;
9) When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime; and
10) When the offender knew of the mental disability emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the offended party at the
time of the commission of the crime.
Rape under paragraph 2 of the next preceding article shall be punished by prision mayor.
Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons, the penalty shall be prision
mayor to reclusion temporal.
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal.
When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion
temporal to reclusion perpetua.
When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, homicide is committed, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua.
Reclusion temporal shall also be imposed if the rape is committed with any of the ten aggravating/qualifying circumstances
mentioned in this article.
ELEMENTS OF RAPE IN PAR.1
1. offender is a man
2. offender had carnal knowledge of a woman
there must be sexual intercourse
penetration, even partial is necessary
slightest penetration is enough
if no sexual intercourse and only acts of lewdness are performed, the crime may be acts of lasciviousness
3. act is accomplished through:
a. force or intimidation
there must be physical struggle, taxing her powers to the utmost; it must be manifest and tenacious
if the woman had contributed is some way to the realization of the act, may constitute an offense different
from rape.
force need not be so great, it is enough that the force used is sufficient to consummate the offenders
purpose of having sex with a woman.
depends on age, size and strength of the parties
intimidation- includes the moral kind such as fear caused by threatening the girl with a knife or pistol
b. woman is deprived of reason or is unconscious
victim has no will
sex with a deaf-mute is not rape in the absence of proof that she is imbecile
UNCONCIOUS:-asleep; lethargy because of sickness; knocked unconscious; narcotic administered to the woman; potion given to a
woman
HOWEVER, if liquor or drugs induced her consent to incite her passion and not deprive her of her will power, NOT rape!
c. by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority
ATTEMPTED RAPE: there is no penetration of the female organ because not all the acts of execution was performed. Offender
merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts.
There must be intent on the part of the accused to have carnal knowledge of the woman against her will.
resignation to consummated act is NOT consent
Character of woman is immaterial in rape
WHEN PUNISHED BY DEATH:
1. by reason or occasion of rape, homicide is committed (SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME)
When homicide is committed NOT be reason or on the occasion of rape, not special complex crime but may
be aggravating the crime of murder with ignominy/cruelty
2. victim under 18 AND offender is
a. parent
b. ascendant
c. stepparent
d. guardian
e. relative by consanguinity or affinity within the 3rd civil degree
f. common-law spouse of the parent of the victim
3. victim under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law enforcement or penal institution
4. rape committed in full view of:
a. husband
b. parent
c. any of the children
d. other relatives within the 3rd civil degree of consanguinity
5. victim is a religious engaged in the legitimate religious vocation or calling AND is personally known to be such by the
offender before or at the time of rape
6. victim below 7 yrs old
7. offender knows he is afflicted by:
a. HIV
b. AIDS
c. Other sexually transmissible disease
AND virus/disease is transmitted
8. offender is:
a. any member of AFP/paramilitary units
b. PNP
c. Any law enforcement agency
d. Penal institution
And took advantage of his position to facilitate the commission of the crime
9. by reason or on the occasion of rape, the victim suffered permanent physical mutilation or disability
10. offender knew that victim was pregnant at the time of the commission of the offense
11. offender knew of the mental disability, emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the offended party at the time of
the commission of the crime
INDEMNITY IN RAPE:
P50,000- mandatory after the finding of the fact of rape
P75,000- if death penalty
P100,000- rape with homicide
DAMAGES IN RAPE:
P50,000- automatically rewarded for moral damages without proof of mental or physical suffereing
Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon. The subsequent valid marriage between the offender and the offended party shall extinguish the
criminal action or the penalty imposed.
In case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as the offended party shall
extinguish the criminal action or the penalty:
Provided, That the crime shall not be extinguished or the penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio.
EFFECT OF MARRIAGE: extinguishes not only the penal action but also the penalty that may be imposed
However, it does not extinguish liability of accomplices and accessories and also to the other principals
Article 266-D. Presumptions. Any physical overt act manifesting resistance against the act of rape in any degree from the
offended party, or where the offended party is so situated as to render her/him incapable of giving valid consent, may be accepted as
evidence in the prosecution of the acts punished under Article 266-A."
EVIDENCE WHICH MAY BE ACCEPTED IN THE PROSECUTION OF RAPE:
1. any physical overt act manifesting resistance against the act of rape in any degree from the offended party
2. where the offended party is so situated as to render him/her incapable of giving consent.
Note: Rape used to be a crime against chastity. Now it is a crime against persons.
The advantage: State can now prosecute in behalf of the victim since this is no longer a private crime. It might encourage more rape
victims to press charges.
The disadvantage: When it was still a crime against chastity, a victim can actually kill the perpetrator in self-defense since honor =
life. In rape cases now, a victim cannot invoke self-defense when he/she kills the rapist absent a clear showing of a threat on his/her
life. In other words, if you are not in danger of dying while being raped, you cannot take the life of your rapist in self defense.
People vs. Orita 184 SCRA 105 (April 3, 1990)
Facts: Cristina, 19 yr old student arrived in her boarding house and Cielito Orita held her and poked a knife at her neck. 1st position:
Lito ordered Cristina to lie down on the floor and he mounted her and made her hold his penis and to insert it in her vagina. She
followed him but he cannot fully penetrate her and so only a portion entered because Cristina kept moving. 2 nd position: Cristina was
to mount him. Again, only a small part was penetrated. Physical exam: hymen intact, no lacerations. RTC: guilty of FRUSTRATED
RAPE because there is no conclusive proof of penetration of the genital organ of the victim. Ruling: There is no crime of frustrated
rape. Dr. Zamora did not rule out penetration of the genital organ of the victim. He merely testified that there was uncertainty WON
there was penetration. Cristina also said in her testimony that there was penetration even only partially. In consummation of rape,
perfect penetration is NOT essential. Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient. Entry of the labia of the
female organ without the 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 the acts of execution were performed. The offender merely
commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts. Crime of rape is consummated from the time 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.
Doctrine: There is no such thing as frustrated rape. There is just a frustrated rapist.
People vs. Mangalino 182 SCRA 329 (February 15, 1990)
Facts: Semion Mangalino inserted his finger and later on forcibly introduced his sexual organ into Marichelles, six yr old,
undeveloped genitalia. Physical exam in NBI concluded that bruises on Marichelles vagina: caused by a hard object like an erected
penis and an indication of an unsuccessful penetration. They discounted the probability of an accident since there was no contusion
on the labia. Semion denied the charges and argued that bruises may be self-inflicted. She was constantly running and might have
bumped her pelvis against a chair which explained the absence of contusions on the labia. Ruling: He is guilty of statutory rape. For
rape to be committed, full penetration is not required. It is enough that there is proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or
pudendum of the female organ. Even the slightest penetration is sufficient to consummate the crime of rape. According to the NBI
report, rape could have been perpetrated. Dr. Garcia certified the existence of indications of recent genital trauma. Vestibular mucosa
was dark red and normally, it was supposed to be pinkish. The forcible attempt of an erected penis caused the 3.5 cm contusion prior
to the hymen. The penile-vaginal contact without penetration was due to 1 cm diameter opening of Marichelles hymen. The victim
being young, the penetration could only go as deep as the labia. Offender and victim being neighbors explain the absence of visible
signs of physical injuries. The reason why Marichelle did not cry was that she did not feel any pain during the attempted sexual
intercourse.
Doctrine: The victim being young, the penetration could only go as deep as the labia. For rape to be committed, full penetration is
not required. It is enough that there is proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or the pudendum of the female organ.
People vs. Balbuena 129 SCRA 10 (April 27, 1984)
Facts: Elvira Polintan accepted an invitation to join the drinking party in Abelardo Balbuenas apartment with long time friend, Juanito
Torres. After Elvira consumed half a glass of gin, she felt dizzy and took a rest on a bench. Then, Abelardo undressed her and
removed her pants and briefs and spread her legs. Abelardo went on top of the billiard table and succeeded in having sex with her.
He then went down the billiard table and Juanito took his turn. Around two months later, she told her mother about what happened
and the following day, they went to the police and reported the incident. She was examined by Dr. Reyes of NBI and there was no
sign of extragenital physical injury and that she could have had sex with a man on or about the date alleged. Ruling: The delay in
reporting the incident was reasonable. It is not easy for a Filipina to easily decide whether to come out in the open where public
contempt and ridicule would result in the prosecution of the case. The innate modesty of Filipinas and their inherent reluctance to be
exposed to the rigors of a trial scandalizing the family name. She was also fearful because of the threats made by Abelardo that they
would kill her family especially so that she resides near the houses of Juanito and Abelardo. Absence of injury can be explained
because it was a month after the incident that she was examined. There was also no torn dress or underwear because she was
wearing pants and briefs. Elvira is a tomboy and so she is sexually attracted to females than to males. She would not willingly submit
herself to sex with a male. Evidence also clear that accused employed force in consummating the offense. From the bench she was
lying down, she was pulled to the billiard table and bodily raised on top of the table where she was forced to lie down.
Abad-Santos Dissent: Filipino women are modest and shy so that she will not publicly complain of having been raped and thereby
expose herself to shame and ridicule unless she was in fact raped but Elvira is not a typical woman because not yet 21, she was
already a guzzler of strong spirits.
Doctrine: The testimony of the victim is most often the only one available to prove directly its commission. The very fact that she
came forward in this case is in itself a silent but persuasive evidence of an outrage done upon her honor.
Note: 1. Tomboys can be raped. They are naturally attracted to females and therefore will not willingly have sex with a man.
2. Ugly girls cannot get raped. But since the perpetrators were in a state of intoxication, her physical appearance was not a bar to the
commission of the offense.
3. Gin guzzlers cannot be raped. They are not typical Filipinas.
People vs. Castro 196 SCRA 679 (May 16, 1991)
Facts: 6 year old Diana Rose was made to stand on the toilet bowl so Kuya Delfin inserted his penis into her causing her pain. NBI:
contused or bruised area inside the genital organ, purplish or dark red and it was subject to some amount of force or it could have
come in contact with a hard object done with a certain amount of force. The hymen was intact. Ruling: The victim being of tender
age, the penetration could only go as deep as the labia. In any case, for rape to be committed, full penetration is not required. It is
enough that there is proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or pudendum of the female organ. Even the slightest
penetration is sufficient to consummate the crime of rape. Perfect penetration, rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina are
not essential for the offense of consummated rape. Entry to the labia or lips of the female organ is sufficient. Dianas remaining a
virgin does not negate rape.
Doctrine: Dianas remaining a virgin does not negate rape. The victim being of tender age, the penetration of the male organ could
only go as deep as the labia. Also, Adamson students have to substantiate their scholastic achievements.
People vs. Atento 196 SCRA 357 (April 26, 1991)
Facts: Glenda Aringo, a 16 yr old developmentally-challenged person, claims that Cesar Atento, her neighbor, raped her 5x. from
April 1986. She said she was raped 4 more times. It was at this time that she felt tickled and described the act as masarap. She
could not anymore conceal her condition because she was already 5 months pregnant. Ruling: Glenda has the intellectual capacity
of a 9 and 12 yr old and is within a mentally defective level. Her judgment unsound and her capacity for higher perceptual processes
is unsatisfactory. Although it is not clear the Cesar employed force, he is still guilty under Paragraph 2 (when the woman is deprived
of reason or is otherwise unconscious) because Glenda is deprived of reason by being mentally deficient. He is also liable under par.
3 (when the victim is under 12) because she has the mentality of a girl less than 12 yrs old at the time she was raped. The absence
of will determines the existence of the rape. Such lack of will may exist not only when the victim is unconscious or totally deprived of
reason, but also when she is suffering some mental deficiency impairing her reason or free will. The deprivation of reason need not
be complete. Mental deficiency or abnormality is sufficient.
Doctrine: Paragraph 3 does not only refer to chronological age but also to mental age.
Note: SC might have been confused. Par 2 refers to a situation wherein the woman is drugged or drunk, etc.
People vs. Campuhan 329 SCRA 270 (March 30, 2000)
Facts: Corazon Pamintuan heard her 4 yr old daughter, Crysthel, cry and she rushed to the bedroom where she saw Primo
Campuhan kneeling before Crysthel whose jogging pants were already removed while his short pants were already down to his
knees. According to Corazon, Primo was forcing his penis into Crysthels vagina. According to the physical exam, there was no
evident sign of extra-genital physical injury. Her hymen was intact and her orifice was only .05 in diameter. Ruling: Mere touching of
the external genitalia by the penis is sufficient to constitute carnal knowledge. But the act of touching should be understood as
inherently part of the entry of the penis into the labias and not the mere touching alone of the mons pubis or the pudendum. There
must be sufficient and convincing proof that the penis indeed touched the labias or slid into the female organ, and not merely stroked
the external surface thereof, for the accused to be convicted of consummated rape. Absent any showing of the slightest penetration
of the female organ, it can only be attempted rape, if not acts of lasciviousness. Primos kneeling position rendered an unbridled
observation impossible. Prosecution was not able to prove that any inter-genital contact was achieved. All the elements for attempted
rape are present; hence, the accused should be punished only for it.
Doctrine: Mere touching does not mean stroking. There must be intent to penetrate.
People vs. Gallo 315 SCRA 461 (September 29, 1999)
Facts: In 1998, an RTC decision found Romeo Gallo guilty of the crime of qualified rape with the penalty of death. In 1999- Gallo filed
a Motion to Re-Open the Case seeking modification of the death sentence to reclusion perpetua in line with the new court rulings on
the attendant circumstances in Sec 11 of RA 7659. According to People vs. Garcia: the additional attendant circumstances introduced
in RA 7659 should be considered as special qualifying circumstances distinctly applicable to the crime of rape and if not pleaded as
such, could only be appreciated as generic aggravating circumstances. The information filed against Gallo does not allege his
relationship with the victim Marites Gallo (his daughter), thus it CANNOT be considered as a qualifying circumstance. Ruling:
Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the law or the constitution form part of the legal system of the land and so the doctrine
forms part of the penal statutes and therefore may be applied retroactively being favorable to the accused who is not a habitual
criminal, notwithstanding that final sentence has already been pronounced against him. The doctrine of People vs. Garcia may be
retroactively applied as it is favorable to him. The case is reopened and the judgment is modified from death to reclusion perpetua.
Doctrine: Special qualifying circumstances have to be alleged in the information for it to be appreciated.
People vs. Berana 311 SCRA 664 (July 29, 1999)
Facts: Early morning, 14 yr old Maria Elena Jarcia was awakened by her bro-in-law, Raul Berana. He pointed a buntot page (long
with some protruding parts and with long and pointed tip) at her neck and warned her not to make any noise or else she will be killed.
She was made to lie down and Berana raised her duster and removed her shorts and underwear. He mashed her breasts and laid on
top of her. He inserted his penis to her vagina and she felt much pain. He kissed her and made several push and pull movements
and then, Maria Elena felt something liquid in her organ. After this, Berana sat down and told Maria Elena not to tell anyone. He then
did it again. Accused claims he was seduced by Elena. Ruling: Physical resistance need not be established in rape cases when
intimidation is exercised upon her and she submits herself against her will to the rapists lust because of fear for life and personal
safety. Relationship qualifies the crime from reclusion perpetua to death under RA 7659. To effectively prosecute Berana for the
crime of rape committed by a relative by affinity within the 3rd civil degree, it must be established that:
1. he is legally married to Elenas sister
2. Elena and Beranas wife are full or half-blood siblings
Prosecution established relationship by the testimonies of Elena (saying that he knows Berana because he is the husband of
my sister) and her mother (saying that he knows Berana because he is the husband of her daughter, Rosa Jarcia). It based its
conviction on Beranas letter addressing Elenas parents as mama at papa and his use of the phrase any inyong manugang, Raul.
Since relationship qualifies the crime of rape, there must be clearer proof of relationship and in this case, it was not adequately
substantiated. Evidence presented is not sufficient to dispel doubts about the true relationship. Although he claims that Elena initiated
the act, he never mentioned this on his letters and instead, unceasingly asks for forgiveness, admitting categorically the offense
charged.
Doctrine: Relationship must be proven for it to be appreciated as a special qualifying circumstance.
Notes: The letters may show remorse for a completely different thing (like Im sorry I gave in to the seduction) and not an apology
for rape.
REPUBLIC ACT No. 9262 (Anti VAWC)
AN ACT DEFINING VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN, PROVIDING FOR PROTECTIVE MEASURES FOR
VICTIMS, PRESCRIBING PENALTIES THEREFORE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
What constitutes violence against women and children?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
d. preventing the woman in engaging in any legitimate profession, etc or controlling the victims own money or
properties, or solely controlling the conjugal or common money or properties
inflicting or threatening to inflict physical harm on oneself for the purposes of controlling the woman
causing or attempting to cause them to engage in any sexual activity which does not constitute rape, by force or threat of
force, physical harm, or through intimidation directed at them or her/his immediate family
engaging in purposeful, knowing, or reckless conduct, personally or through another, that alarms or causes
substantial emotional or psychological distress to the woman or child. This includes:
a. stalking them in public or private places
b. peering in the window or lingering outside the residence
c. entering or remaining in their dwelling or on their property against her/his will
d. destroying the property and personal belongings or inflicting harm to animals or pets of the woman or her child
e. engaging in any form of harassment or violence
causing mental or emotional anguish, public ridicule or humiliation to them, including repeated verbal abuse and
emotional abuse, and denial of financial support or custody of minor children of access to the womans child/children
RTC, MTC, MCTC with territorial jurisdiction or in a family court if available in the area.
Note: The protection order takes the shape of a penalty and violates the constitutional right of presumption of innocence. It presumes
the perpetrator is guilty even before he is heard.