Baleros, Jr. vs. People

G.R. No. 138033. February 22, 2006.
*
RENATO BALEROS, JR., petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, respondent.
Criminal Procedure; Evidence; Positive identification pertains essentially
to proof of identity and not per se to that of being an eyewitness to the very act
of commission of the crime; There are two types of positive identification.
Positive identification pertains essentially to proof of identity and not per se to
that of being an eyewitness to the very act of commission of the crime. There
are two types of positive identification. A witness may identify a suspect or
accused as the offender as an eyewitness to the very act of the commission of
the crime. This constitutes direct evidence. There may, however, be instances
where, although a witness may not have actually witnessed the very act of
commission of a crime, he may still be able to positively identify a suspect or
accused as the perpetrator of a crime as when, for instance, the latter is the
person or one of the persons last seen with the victim immediately before and
right after the
_______________
*
SECOND DIVISION.
11
VOL. 483, FEBRUARY 22, 2006

11
Baleros, Jr. vs. People
commission of the crime. This is the second type of positive identification,
which forms part of circumstantial evidence. In the absence of direct evidence,
the prosecution may resort to adducing circumstantial evidence to discharge its
burden. Crimes are usually committed in secret and under condition where
concealment is highly probable. If direct evidence is insisted under all
circumstances, the prosecution of vicious felons who committed heinous crimes
in secret or secluded places will be hard, if not well-nigh impossible, to prove.
Same; Same; Conditions when Circumstantial Evidence may be Sufficient
for Conviction.Section 4 of Rule 133 of the Rules of Court provides the
conditions when circumstantial evidence may be sufficient for conviction. The
provision reads: Sec. 4. Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction ifa) There is more than
one circumstance; b) The facts from which the inferences are derived are
proven; and c) The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a
conviction beyond reasonable doubt.
Criminal Law; Rape; Essential Elements of Rape under Article 335 of the
Revised Penal Code; Circumstances when Rape is Deemed Attempted.Under
Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, rape is committed by a man who has
carnal knowledge or intercourse with a woman under any of the following
circumstances: (1) By using force or intimidation; (2) When the woman is

deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) When the woman is under
twelve years of age or is demented. Under Article 6, in relation to the
aforementioned article of the same code, 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.
Same; Same; The attempt which the Penal Code punishes is that which has
a logical connection to a particular, concrete offense; that which is the
beginning of the execution of the offense by overt acts of the perpetrator,
leading directly to its realization and consumma-tion.Expounding on the
nature of an attempted felony, the Court, speaking thru Justice Claro M. Recto
in People vs. Lamahang, stated that the attempt which the Penal Code
punishes is that which has a logical connection to a particular, concrete
offense; that which
12
1
2
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

is the beginning of the execution of the offense by overt acts of the perpetrator,
leading directly to its realization and consummation. Absent the unavoidable
connection, like the logical and natural relation of the cause and its effect, as
where the purpose of the offender in performing an act is not certain, meaning
the nature of the act in relation to its objective is ambiguous, then what obtains
is an attempt to commit an indeterminate offense, which is not a juridical fact
from the standpoint of the Penal Code.
Same; Same; Words and Phrases; Definition of Overt or External Act.
Overt or external act has been defined as some physical activity or deed,
indicating the intention to commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning
or preparation, which if carried out to its complete termination following its
natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the
voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into
a concrete offense.
Same; Same; Evidence; Mere speculations and probabilities cannot
substitute for proof required to establish the guilt of an accused beyond
reasonable doubt.The appellate court indulges in plain speculation, a practice
disfavored under the rule on evidence in criminal cases. For, mere speculations
and probabilities cannot substitute for proof required to establish the guilt of an
accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Same; Same; Unjust Vexation; The series of acts committed by the
petitioner constitute unjust vexation punishable as light coercion under the
second paragraph of Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code; Unjust vexation
exists even without the element of restraint or compulsion for the reason that
this term is broad enough to include any human conduct which although not
productive of some physical or material harm would unjustly annoy or irritate
an innocent person.Lest it be misunderstood, the Court is not saying that
petitioner is innocent, under the premises, of any wrongdoing whatsoever. The
information filed against petitioner contained an allegation that he forcefully
covered the face of Malou with a piece of cloth soaked in chemical. And during
the trial, Malou testified about the pressing against her face of the chemicalsoaked cloth and having struggled after petitioner held her tightly and pinned
her down. Verily, while the series of acts committed by the petitioner do not
determine at13

13
tempted rape, as earlier discussed, they constitute unjust vexation punishable as
light coercion under the second paragraph of Article 287 of the Revised Penal
Code. In the context of the constitutional provision assuring an accused of a
crime the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation, it
cannot be said that petitioner was kept in the dark of the inculpatory acts for
which he was proceeded against. To be sure, the information against petitioner
contains sufficient details to enable him to make his defense. As aptly observed
by then Justice Ramon C. Aquino, there is no need to allege malice, restraint or
compulsion in an information for unjust vexation. As it were, unjust vexation
exists even without the element of restraint or compulsion for the reason that
this term is broad enough to include any human conduct which, although not
productive of some physical or material harm, would unjustly annoy or irritate
an innocent person. The paramount question is whether the offenders act
causes annoyance, irritation, torment, distress or disturbance to the mind of the
person to whom it is directed.
PETITION for review on certiorari of the decision and resolution of

the Court of Appeals.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
Prospero A.S. Crescini for petitioner.
The Solicitor General for the People.
GARCIA, J.:
In this petition for review on certiorari, petitioner Renato Baleros, Jr.
assails and seeks the reversal of the January 13, 1999 decision1 of the
Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 17271 as reiterated in its
March 31, 1999 resolution2 denying petitioners motion for

reconsideration.
The assailed decision affirmed an earlier decision of the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 2, in Criminal
_______________
1 Penned by Associate Justice Martin S. Villarama, Jr. and concurred in by
Associate Justices Romeo A. Brawner (ret.) and Eloy R. Bello, Jr. (ret.); Rollo, pp.
198-237.
2Id., p. 273.
14
1
4

Case No. 91-101642 finding petitioner Renato Baleros, Jr. y David
(CHITO) guilty of attempted rape.3
The accusatory portion of the information4 dated December 17,
1991 charging petitioner with attempted rape reads as follow:
That about 1:50 in the morning or sometime thereafter of 13 December 1991 in
Manila and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused, by forcefully covering the face of Martina Lourdes T. Albano with a
piece of cloth soaked in chemical with dizzying effects, did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously commenced the commission of rape by
lying on top of her with the intention to have carnal knowledge with her but was
unable to perform all the acts of execution by reason of some cause or accident
other than his own spontaneous desistance, said acts being committed against
her will and consent to her damage and prejudice.
Upon arraignment on February 5, 1992, petitioner, assisted by

counsel, pleaded Not Guilty.5 Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.
To prove its case, the prosecution presented thirteen (13)
witnesses. Among them were private complainant Martina Lourdes
Albano (Malou), and her classmates, Joseph Bernard Africa, Rommel
Montes, Renato Alagadan and Christian Alcala. Their testimonies, as
narrated in some detail in the decision of the CA, established the
following facts:
Like most of the tenants of the Celestial Marie Building (hereafter Building, .
. .) along A.H. Lacson Street, Sampaloc, Manila, MALOU, occupying Room
307 with her maid, Marvilou Bebania (Marvilou), was a medical student of the
University of Sto. Tomas [UST] in 1991.
_______________
3Id.,
pp. 120-155.
4 Original Records, pp. 1-3.
5Id., p. 42.
15

15
In the evening of December 12, inside Unit 307, MALOU retired at around
10:30. Outside, right in front of her bedroom door, her maid, Marvilou, slept on
a folding bed.
Early morning of the following day, MALOU was awakened by the smell of
chemical on a piece of cloth pressed on her face. She struggled but could not
move. Somebody was pinning her down on the bed, holding her tightly. She
wanted to scream for help but the hands covering her mouth with cloth wet with
chemicals were very tight (TSN, July 5, 1993, p. 33). Still, MALOU continued
fighting off her attacker by kicking him until at last her right hand got free.
With this . . . the opportunity presented itself when she was able to grab hold of
his sex organ which she then squeezed.
The man let her go and MALOU went straight to the bedroom door and
roused Marvilou. x x x. Over the intercom, MALOU told S/G Ferolin that:
may pumasok sa kuarto ko pinagtangkaan ako (Ibid., p. 8). Who it was she
did not, however, know. The only thing she had made out during their struggle
was the feel of her attackers clothes and weight. His upper garment was of
cotton material while that at the lower portion felt smooth and satin-like (Ibid.,
p. 17). He . . . was wearing a t-shirt and shorts . . . Original Records, p. 355).
To Room 310 of the Building where her classmates Christian Alcala,
Bernard Baptista, Lutgardo Acosta and Rommel Montes were staying, MALOU
then proceeded to seek help. x x x. It was then when MALOU saw her bed . . .
topsy-turvy. Her nightdress was stained with blue . . . (TSN, July 5, 1993, pp.
13-14). Aside from the window with grills which she had originally left opened,
another window inside her bedroom was now open. Her attacker had fled from
her room going through the left bedroom window (Ibid., Answers to Question
number 5; Id.), the one without iron grills which leads to Room 306 of the
Building (TSN, July 5, 1993, p. 6).
xxx xxx xxx
Further, MALOU testified that her relation with CHITO, who was her
classmate . . . , was friendly until a week prior to the attack. CHITO confided
his feelings for her, telling her: Gusto kita, mahal kita (TSN, July 5, 1993, p.
22) and she rejected him. . . . . (TSN, July 5, 1993, p. 22).
Meanwhile, according to S/G Ferolin, while he was on duty, CHITO arrived
at the Building at 1:30 in the early morning of De16
6
cember 13, 1991, wearing a white t-shirt with . . . a marking on the front of
the T-shirt T M and a Greek letter (sic) and below the quoted letters the
word 1946 UST Medicine and Surgery (TSN, October 9, 1992, p. 9) and
black shorts with the brand name Adidas (TSN, October 16, 1992, p. 7) and
requested permission to go up to Room 306. This Unit was being leased by
Ansbert Co and at that time when CHITO was asking permission to enter, only
Joseph Bernard Africa was in the room.
He asked CHITO to produce the required written authorization and when
CHITO could not, S/G Ferolin initially refused [but later, relented] . . . . S/G
Ferolin made the following entry in the security guards logbook . . . :
0130 Baleros Renato Jr. is a visitor of Ansbert Co who has not
H
have (sic) a Request letter from our tenant of Unit #-306
Ansbert, but still I let him inter (sic) for the reason that
he will be our tenant this coming summer break as he
said so I let him sign it here
(Sgd.) Baleros Renato Jr. (Exhibit A-2)
That CHITO arrived at Room 306 at 1:30 A.M. of December 13, 1991 was
corroborated by Joseph Bernard Africa (Joseph), . . . .
xxx
xxx
xxx
Joseph was already inside Room 306 at 9 oclock in the evening of
December 12, 1991. x x x by the time CHITOs knocking on the door woke him
up, . . . . He was able to fix the time of CHITOs arrival at 1:30 A.M. because
he glanced at the alarm clock beside the bed when he was awakened by the
knock at the door . . . .
Joseph noticed that CHITO was wearing dark-colored shorts and white Tshirt (Ibid., p. 23) when he let the latter in. . . . . It was at around 3 oclock in the
morning of December 13, 1991 when he woke up again later to the sound of
knocking at the door, this time, by Bernard Baptista (Bernard), . . . .
x x x. With Bernard, Joseph then went to MALOUs room and thereat was
shown by Bernard the open window through which the intruder supposedly
passed.
xxx
xxx
xxx
Later, at about 6 to 6:30 in the morning of December 13, 1991, Joseph was
finally able to talk to CHITO . . . . He mentioned to the
17

17
latter that something had happened and that they were not being allowed to get
out of the building. Joseph also told CHITO to follow him to Room 310.
CHITO did just that. He followed after Joseph to Unit 310, carrying his gray
bag. x x x. None was in Room 310 so Joseph went to their yet another
classmate, Renato Alagadan at Room 401 to see if the others were there. x x x.
People from the CIS came by before 8 oclock that same morning . . . . They
likewise invited CHITO and Joseph to go with them to Camp Crame where the
two (2) were questioned . . . .
An occupant of Room 310 . . . Christian Alcala (Christian) recalled in Court
that in the afternoon of December 13, 1991, after their 3:30 class, he and his
roommates, Bernard Baptista and Lutgardo Acosta (Gary) were called to the
Building and were asked by the CIS people to look for anything not belonging
to them in their Unit. While they were outside Room 310 talking with the
authorities, Rommel Montes (Loyloy), another roommate of his, went inside to
search the Unit. Loyloy found (TSN, January 12, 1993, p. 6) a gray
Khumbella bag cloth type (Ibid., pp. 44-45) from inside their unit which they
did not know was there and surrender the same to the investigators. When he
saw the gray bag, Christian knew right away that it belonged to CHITO (Ibid.,
p. 55) as he had seen the latter usually bringing it to school inside the classroom
(Ibid., p. 45).
In their presence, the CIS opened the bag and pulled out its contents, among
others, a white t-shirt with a Taunu (sic) Sigma Phi sign (Ibid., p. 7), a Black
Adidas short pants, a handkerchief, three (3) white T-shirts, an underwear, and
socks (Ibid.).
Christian recognized the t-shirt (Exhibit D-4), the Adidas short pants
(Exhibit D-5), and the handkerchief (Exhibit D-3) to be CHITOs because
CHITO had lent the very same one to him . . . . The t-shirt with CHITOs
fraternity symbol, CHITO used to wear on weekends, and the handkerchief he
saw CHITO used at least once in December.
That CHITO left his bag inside Room 310 in the morning of December 13,
1991, was what consisted mainly of Renato R. Alagadans testimony.
xxx
xxx
x x x.
The colored gray bag had a handle and a strap, was elongated to about 11/4
feet and appeared to be full but was closed with a
18
1
8

zipper when Renato saw it then (Ibid., pp. 19-20). At that time Christian, Gary,
Bernard, and Renato went back to Room 310 at around 3 to 4 oclock that
afternoon along with some CIS agents, they saw the bag at the same place
inside the bedroom where Renato had seen CHITO leave it. Not until later that
night at past 9 oclock in Camp Crame, however, did Renato know what the
contents of the bag were.
xxx
xxx
x x x.
The forensic Chemist, Leslie Chambers, of the Philippine National Police
Crime Laboratory in Camp Crame, having acted in response to the written

request of PNP Superintendent Lucas M. Managuelod dated December 13,
1991, (Exhibit C; Original Records, p. 109.) conducted laboratory
examination on the specimen collated and submitted. . . . Her Chemistry Report
No. C-487-91 (Exhibit E; Ibid., p. 112) reads in part, thus:
SPECIMEN SUBMITTED:
xxx
xxx
x x x:
1) One (1) small white plastic bag marked UNIMART with the following:
xxx
xxx
xxx
Exh COne (1) night dress colored salmon pink.
2) One (1) small white plastic bag marked JONAS with the following:
Exh. DOne (1) printed handkerchief.
Exh. EOne (1) white T-shirt marked TMZI.
Exh. FOne (1) black short (sic) marked
ADIDAS.
PURPOSE OF LABORATORY EXAMINATION:
To determine the presence of volatime (sic), non-volatile and/or metallic
poison on the above stated specimens.
FINDINGS:
Toxicological examination conducted on the above stated specimens gave
the following results:
Exhs. C and DPOSITIVE to the test for chloroform, a volatile
poison.
19

19
Exhs. A, B, E and F are insufficient for further analysis.

CONCLUSION:
Exhs. C and D contain chloroform, a volatile poison.6 (Words in bracket
added)
For its part, the defense presented, as its main witness, the petitioner
himself. He denied committing the crime imputed to him or making at
any time amorous advances on Malou. Unfolding a different version
of the incident, the defense sought to establish the following, as culled
from the same decision of the appellate court:
In December of 1991, CHITO was a medical student of (UST). With Robert
Chan and Alberto Leonardo, he was likewise a member of the Tau Sigma Phi
Fraternity . . . . MALOU, . . . , was known to him being also a medical student

at the UST at the time.
From Room 306 of the Celestial Marie Building . . . , CHITO, wearing the
prescribed barong tagalog over dark pants and leather shoes, arrived at their
Fraternity house located at . . . Dos Castillas, Sampaloc, Manila at about 7
oclock in the evening of December 12, 1991. He was included in the entourage
of some fifty (50) fraternity members scheduled for a Christmas gathering at the
house of their senior fraternity brother, Dr. Jose Duran, at No. 3 John Street,
North Greenhills, San Juan. x x x.
The party was conducted at the garden beside [the] swimming pool . . . .
Soon after, . . . the four (4) presidential nominees of the Fraternity, CHITO
included, were being dunked one by one into the pool. x x x.
x x x CHITO had anticipated his turn . . . and was thus wearing his t-shirt
and long pants when he was dunked. Perla Duran, . . . , offered each . . . dry
clothes to change into and CHITO put on the white t-shirt with the Fraternitys
symbol and a pair of black shorts with stripes. x x x.
Again riding on Albertos car and wearing barong tagalog over a white tshirt with the symbol TAU Sigma Phi, black short pants
_______________
6
Rollo, pp. 201-212.
20
2
0

with stripe, socks and shoes (TSN, April 25, 1994, p. 15), CHITO left the party
with Robert Chan and Alberto at more or less past 1 A.M. of December 13,
1991 and proceeded to the Building which they reached at about 1:30 A.M.
(Ibid., p. 19). He had left his gray traveling bag containing white t-shirt, sando,
underwear, socks, and toothbrush (Ibid., pp. 17-18) at room 306 in the afternoon
of the previous day . . . .
At the gate of the Building, CHITO knocked and , S/G Ferolin, looking at
his watch, approached. Because of this, CHITO also looked at his own watch
and saw that the time was 1:30 (Ibid., p. 26). S/G Ferolin initially refused
CHITO entry . . . . x x x.
S/G Ferolin called Unit 306 . . . . x x x. When S/G Ferolin finally let him in,
already about ten (10) minutes had lapsed since CHITO first arrived (Ibid., p.
25).
CHITO went up the floor, found the key left for him by Joseph behind the
opened jalousie window and for five (5) minutes vainly tried to open the door
until Rommel Montes, . . . approached him and even commented: Okey ang
suot mo ha, di mo mabuksan ang pinto (Ibid., pp. 26-29). Rommel tried to open
the door of Unit 306 . . . but was likewise unsuccessful. CHITO then decided to
just call out to Joseph while knocking at the door.

It took another (5) minutes of calling out and knocking before Joseph, . . . ,
at last answered the door. Telling him, Ikaw na ang bahala diyan Joseph
immediately turned his back on CHITO and went inside the bedroom. CHITO ,
. . . changed to a thinner shirt and went to bed. He still had on the same short
pants given by Perla Duran from the fraternity party (TSN, June 16, 1994, p.
20).
At 6 oclock in the morning of December 13, 1991, CHITO woke up . . . .
He was already in his school uniform when, around 6:30 A.M, Joseph came to
the room not yet dressed up. He asked the latter why this was so and, without
elaborating on it, Joseph told him that something had happened and to just go to
Room 310 which CHITO did.
At Room 310, CHITO was told by Rommel Montes that somebody, whom
MALOU was not able to identify, went to the room of MALOU and tried to
rape her (TSN, April 25, 1994, p. 36). x x x.
Joseph told him that the security guard was not letting anybody out of the
Building . . . . When two (2) CIS men came to the unit asking for Renato
Baleros, CHITO presented himself. Congressman
21

21
Rodolfo B. Albano, father of MALOU, then asked him for the key to Room
306. . . .
xxx
xxx
xxx
The CIS men looked inside the bedroom and on the windows. Joseph was
told to dress up and the two (2) of them, CHITO and Joseph, were brought to
Camp Crame.
When they arrived at Camp Crame . . . , Col. Managuelod asked Joseph
inside his room and talked to him for 30 minutes. x x x. No one interviewed
CHITO to ask his side.
xxx
xxx
xxx
Both CHITO and Joseph were taken to Prosecutor Abesamis who later
instructed them to undergo physical examination at the Camp Crame Hospital . .
. . . At the hospital, . . . CHITO and Joseph were physically examined by a
certain Dr. de Guzman who told them to strip . . . .
xxx
xxx
xxx
CHITO had left his gray bag containing, among others, the black striped
short pants lent to him by Perla Duran (Exhibit 8-A, Original Records, p.
345), inside Room 310 at more/less 6:30 to 7 oclock in the morning of
December 13, 1991. The next time that he saw it was between 8 to 9 P.M. when
he and Joseph were brought before Fiscal Abesamis for inquest. One of the CIS
agents had taken it there and it was not opened up in his presence but the
contents of the bag were already laid out on the table of Fiscal Abesamis who,
however, made no effort to ask CHITO if the items thereat were his.
The black Adidas short pants purportedly found in the bag, CHITO denied
putting in his gray bag which he had left at Room 306 in the early evening of
December 12, 1991 before going to the fraternity house. He likewise disavowed
placing said black Adidas short pants in his gray bag when he returned to the
apartment at past 1:00 oclock in the early morning of December 13, 1991
(TSN, June 16, 1994, p. 24), nor when he dressed up at about 6 oclock in the
morning to go to school and brought his gray bag to Room 310 (Ibid., 25). In
fact, at any time on December 13, 1991, he was not aware that his gray bag ever
contained any black short Adidas pants (Ibid.). He only found out for the first
time that the black Adidas short pants was alluded to be among the items inside
his gray bag late in the afternoon, when he was in Camp Crame.
22
2
2

Also taking the witness stand for the defense were petitioners
fraternity brothers, Alberto Leonardo and Robert Chan, who both
testified being with CHITO in the December 12, 1991 party held in
Dr. Durans place at Greenhills, riding on the same car going to and
coming from the party and dropping the petitioner off the Celestial
Marie building after the party. Both were one in saying that CHITO
was wearing a barong tagalog, with t-shirt inside, with short pants and
leather shoes at the time they parted after the party.7 Rommel Montes,
a tenant of Room 310 of the said building, also testified seeing
CHITO between the hours of 1:30 and 2:00 A.M. of December 13,
1991 trying to open the door of Room 306 while clad in dark short
pants and white barong tagalog.
On the other hand, Perla Duran confirmed lending the petitioner
the pair of short pants with stripes after the dunking party held in her
fathers house.8 Presented as defense expert witness was Carmelita
Vargas, a forensic chemistry instructor whose actual demonstration in
open court showed that chloroform, being volatile, evaporates in
thirty (30) seconds without tearing nor staining the cloth on which it
is applied.9 On December 14, 1994, the trial court rendered its
decision10 convicting petitioner of attempted rape and accordingly
sentencing him, thus:
WHEREFORE, under cool reflection and prescinding from the foregoing, the
Court finds the accused Renato D. Baleros, Jr., alias Chito, guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime of attempted rape as principal and as charged in

the information and hereby sentences him to suffer an imprisonment ranging
from FOUR (4) YEARS, TWO (2) MONTHS AND ONE (1) DAY of Prision
Correccional, as Minimum to TEN (10) YEARS of Prision Mayor as
Maximum, with all the accessory penalties provided by law, and for the
_______________
TSN, December 15, 1993, pp. 18-19; TSN, December 20, 1993, pp. 23-24.
TSN, January 17, 1994, pp. 7-10.
9 TSN, January 17, 1994, p. 24.
10 Rollo, pp. 120-155.
7
8
23

23
accused to pay the offended party Martina Lourdes T. Albano, the sum of
P50,000.00 by way of Moral and exemplary damages, plus reasonable
Attorneys fees of P30,000.00, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of
insolvency, and to pay the costs.
SO ORDERED.
Aggrieved, petitioner went to the CA whereat his appellate recourse

was docketed as CA-G.R. CR No. 17271.
As stated at the threshold hereof, the CA, in its assailed Decision
dated January 13, 1999, affirmed the trial courts judgment of
conviction, to wit:
WHEREFORE, finding no basis in fact and in law to deviate from the findings
of the court a quo, the decision appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED in toto.
Costs against appellant.
SO ORDERED.11
Petitioner moved for reconsideration, but his motion was denied by

the CA in its equally assailed resolution of March 31, 1999.12
Petitioner is now with this Court, on the contention that the CA
erred
1.
1.In not finding that it is improbable for petitioner to have
committed the attempted rape imputed to him, absent sufficient,
competent and convincing evidence to prove the offense
charged.
2.
2.In convicting petitioner of attempted rape on the basis merely
of circumstantial evidence since the prosecution failed to satisfy
all the requisites for conviction based thereon.
3.
3.In not finding that the circumstances it relied on to convict the
petitioner are unreliable, inconclusive and contradictory.
4.
4.In not finding that proof of motive is miserably wanting in his

case.
_______________
See Note #1, supra.
12 See Note #2, supra.
11
24
2
4

1.
5.In awarding damages in favor of the complainant despite the
fact that the award was improper and unjustified absent any
evidence to prove the same.
2.
6.In failing to appreciate in his favor the constitutional
presumption of innocence and that moral certainty has not been
met, hence, he should be acquitted on the ground that the
offense charged against him has not been proved beyond
reasonable doubt.
Otherwise stated, the basic issue in this case turns on the question on
whether or not the CA erred in affirming the ruling of the RTC
finding petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
attempted rape.
After a careful review of the facts and evidence on record in the
light of applicable jurisprudence, the Court is disposed to rule for
petitioners acquittal, but not necessarily because there is no direct
evidence pointing to him as the intruder holding a chemical-soaked
cloth who pinned Malou down on the bed in the early morning of
December 13, 1991.
Positive identification pertains essentially to proof of identity and
not per se to that of being an eyewitness to the very act of
commission of the crime. There are two types of positive
identification. A witness may identify a suspect or accused as the
offender as an eyewitness to the very act of the commission of the
crime. This constitutes direct evidence. There may, however, be
instances where, although a witness may not have actually witnessed
the very act of commission of a crime, he may still be able to
positively identify a suspect or accused as the perpetrator of a crime
as when, for instance, the latter is the person or one of the persons last
seen with the victim immediately before and right after the
commission of the crime. This is the second type of positive
identification, which forms part of circumstantial evidence.13 In the
absence of direct evidence, the prosecution may resort to adducing
circumstantial evidence to discharge its burden. Crimes are
_______________
13People
vs. Cubcubin, Jr., 413 Phil. 249; 360 SCRA 690 (2001), citing People vs.
Gallarde, 382 Phil. 718; 325 SCRA 835 (2000).
25

25
usually committed in secret and under condition where concealment is
highly probable. If direct evidence is insisted under all circumstances,
the prosecution of vicious felons who committed heinous crimes in
secret or secluded places will be hard, if not well-nigh impossible, to
prove.14
Section 4 of Rule 133 of the Rules of Court provides the
conditions when circumstantial evidence may be sufficient for
conviction. The provision reads:
Sec. 4. Circumstantial evidence, when sufficientCircumstantial evidence is
sufficient for conviction if
1. a)There is more than one circumstance;
2. b)The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
3. c)The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction
beyond reasonable doubt.
In the present case, the positive identification of the petitioner forms

part of circumstantial evidence, which, when taken together with the
other pieces of evidence constituting an unbroken chain, leads to only
fair and reasonable conclusion, which is that petitioner was the
intruder in question.
We quote with approval the CAs finding of the circumstantial
evidence that led to the identity of the petitioner as such intruder:
Chito was in the Building when the attack on MALOU took place. He had
access to the room of MALOU as Room 307 where he slept the night over had a
window which allowed ingress and egress to Room 306 where MALOU stayed.
Not only the Building security guard, S/G Ferolin, but Joseph Bernard Africa as
well confirmed that CHITO was wearing a black Adidas shorts and fraternity
T-shirt when he arrived at the Building/Unit 307 at 1:30 in the morning of
December 13, 1991. Though it was dark during their struggle, MALOU had
made out the feel of her intruders apparel to be some_______________

People vs. Sevilleno, 425 SCRA 247 (2004), citing People vs. Navarro, Jr., 407 SCRA
221 (2003).
14
26
2
6

thing made of cotton material on top and shorts that felt satin-smooth on the
bottom.
From CHITOs bag which was found inside Room 310 at the very spot
where witness Renato Alagadan saw CHITO leave it, were discovered the most
incriminating evidence: the handkerchief stained with blue and wet with some
kind of chemicals; a black Adidas satin short pants; and a white fraternity Tshirt, also stained with blue. A different witness, this time, Christian Alcala,
identified these garments as belonging to CHITO. As it turned out, laboratory
examination on these items and on the beddings and clothes worn by MALOU
during the incident revealed that the handkerchief and MALOUs night dress
both contained chloroform, a volatile poison which causes first degree burn
exactly like what MALOU sustained on that part of her face where the
chemical-soaked cloth had been pressed.
This brings the Court to the issue on whether the evidence adduced by
the prosecution has established beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of
the petitioner for the crime of attempted rape.
The Solicitor General maintained that petitioner, by pressing on
Malous face the piece of cloth soaked in chemical while holding her
body tightly under the weight of his own, had commenced the
performance of an act indicative of an intent or attempt to rape the
victim. It is argued that petitioners actuation thus described is an
overt act contemplated under the law, for there can not be any other
logical conclusion other than that the petitioner intended to ravish
Malou after he attempted to put her to an induced sleep. The Solicitor
General, echoing what the CA said, adds that if petitioners intention
was otherwise, he would not have lain on top of the victim.15 Under
Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, rape is committed by a man
who has carnal knowledge or intercourse with a woman under any of
the following circumstances: (1) By using force or intimidation; (2)
When the woman is de_______________
15
Comment, pp. 20-21; Rollo, pp. 302-303.

27

27
prived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) When the woman
is under twelve years of age or is demented. Under Article 6, in
relation to the aforementioned article of the same code, 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.16
Expounding on the nature of an attempted felony, the Court,
speaking thru Justice Claro M. Recto in People vs. Lamahang,17 stated
that the attempt which the Penal Code punishes is that which has a
logical connection to a particular, concrete offense; that which is the
beginning of the execution of the offense by overt acts of the
perpetrator, leading directly to its realization and consummation.
Absent the unavoidable connection, like the logical and natural
relation of the cause and its effect, as where the purpose of the
offender in performing an act is not certain, meaning the nature of the
act in relation to its objective is ambiguous, then what obtains is an
attempt to commit an indeterminate offense, which is not a juridical
fact from the standpoint of the Penal Code.18
There is absolutely no dispute about the absence of sexual
intercourse or carnal knowledge in the present case. The next question
that thus comes to the fore is whether or not the act of the petitioner,
i.e., the pressing of a chemical-soaked cloth while on top of Malou,
constitutes an overt act of rape.
Overt or external act has been defined as some physical activity or
deed, indicating the intention to commit a particular crime, more than
a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to its complete
termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by
external obstacles nor by
_______________
People vs. Campuhan, 385 Phil. 912; 329 SCRA 270 (2000).
61 Phil. 703, 705 (1935).
18 Ibid.
16
17
28
2
8

the voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and
necessarily ripen into a concrete offense.19
Harmonizing the above definition to the facts of this case, it would
be too strained to construe petitioners act of pressing a chemicalsoaked cloth in the mouth of Malou which would induce her to sleep
as an overt act that will logically and necessarily ripen into rape. As it
were, petitioner did not commence at all the performance of any act
indicative of an intent or attempt to rape Malou. It cannot be
overemphasized that petitioner was fully clothed and that there was
no attempt on his part to undress Malou, let alone touch her private
part. For what reason petitioner wanted the complainant unconscious,
if that was really his immediate intention, is anybodys guess. The CA
maintained that if the petitioner had no intention to rape, he would not
have lain on top of the complainant. Plodding on, the appellate court
even anticipated the next step that the petitioner would have taken if
the victim had been rendered unconscious. Wrote the CA:
The shedding of the clothes, both of the attacker and his victim, will have to
come later. His sexual organ is not yet exposed because his intended victim is
still struggling. Where the intended victim is an educated woman already
mature in age, it is very unlikely that a rapist would be in his naked glory before
even starting his attack on her. He has to make her lose her guard first, or as in
this case, her unconsciousness.20
At bottom then, the appellate court indulges in plain speculation, a

practice disfavored under the rule on evidence in criminal cases. For,
mere speculations and probabilities cannot substitute for proof
required to establish the guilt of an accused beyond reasonable
doubt.21
_______________
Reyes, The Revised Penal Code, 1998 Edition, p. 91.
Rollo, pp. 222-223.
21 People vs. Canlas, 423 Phil. 665; 372 SCRA 401 (2001).
19
20
29

29
In Perez vs. Court of Appeals,22 the Court acquitted therein petitioner
of the crime of attempted rape, pointing out that:

x x x. 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.
xxx
xxx
xxx
Petitioners act of lying on top of the complainant, embracing and kissing
her, mashing her breasts, inserting his hand inside her panty and touching her
sexual organ, while admittedly obscene and detestable acts, do not constitute
attempted rape absent any showing that petitioner actually commenced to force
his penis into the complainants sexual organ. x x x.
Likewise in People vs. Pancho,23 the Court held:

x x x, appellant was merely holding complainants feet when his Tito Onio
arrived at the alleged locus criminis. Thus, it would be stretching to the extreme
our credulity if we were to conclude that mere holding of the feet is attempted
rape.
Lest it be misunderstood, the Court is not saying that petitioner is

innocent, under the premises, of any wrongdoing whatsoever. The
information filed against petitioner contained an allegation that he
forcefully covered the face of Malou with a piece of cloth soaked in
chemical. And during the trial, Malou testified about the pressing
against her face of the chemical-soaked cloth and having struggled
after petitioner held her tightly and pinned her down. Verily, while the
series of acts committed by the petitioner do not determine attempted
rape, as earlier discussed, they constitute unjust vexation punishable
as light coercion under the second paragraph of Article 287 of the
Revised Penal Code. In the context
_______________
431 Phil. 786; 382 SCRA 182 (2002).
23 416 SCRA 506 (2003).
22
30
3
0

of the constitutional provision assuring an accused of a crime the right
to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation,24 it cannot be
said that petitioner was kept in the dark of the inculpatory acts for
which he was proceeded against. To be sure, the information against
petitioner contains sufficient details to enable him to make his

defense. As aptly observed by then Justice Ramon C. Aquino, there is
no need to allege malice, restraint or compulsion in an information for
unjust vexation. As it were, unjust vexation exists even without the
element of restraint or compulsion for the reason that this term is
broad enough to include any human conduct which, although not
productive of some physical or material harm, would unjustly annoy
or irritate an innocent person.25 The paramount question is whether
the offenders act causes annoyance, irritation, torment, distress or
disturbance to the mind of the person to whom it is directed.26 That
Malou, after the incident in question, cried while relating to her
classmates what she perceived to be a sexual attack and the fact that
she filed a case for attempted rape proved beyond cavil that she was
disturbed, if not distressed by the acts of petitioner.
The penalty for coercion falling under the second paragraph of
Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code is arresto menor or a fine
ranging from P5.00 to P200.00 or both.
WHEREFORE, the assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals
affirming that of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, is hereby
REVERSED and SET ASIDE and a new one entered ACQUITTING
petitioner Renato D. Baleros, Jr. of the charge for attempted rape.
Petitioner, however, is adjudged GUILTY of light coercion and is
accordingly sentenced to 30 days of arresto menor and to pay a fine
of P200.00, with the accessory penalties thereof and to pay the costs.
_______________
Sec. 14(2), Art. III.
25 Aquino, Revised Penal Code, 1997 ed., Vol. III, p. 81.
26 Ibid., citing People vs. Lilian Gozum, CA 54 O.G. 7409; People vs. Reyes, 60
Phil. 369 (1934).
31
24

31
Ferrer vs. People
SO ORDERED.
Puno (Chairperson), Sandoval-Gutierrez and Azcuna, JJ.,
concur.
Corona, J., On Leave.
Assailed decision reversed and set aside. Petitioner Renato D.
Baleros, Jr. acquitted from charge of attempted rape but guilty of
light coercion.
Note.In the absence of direct evidence, the prosecution may
resort to adducing circumstantial evidence to discharge its burden.
(People vs. Santiago, 398 SCRA 234 [2003])
o0o
Copyright 2012 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.

Baleros, Jr. vs. People

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Baleros, Jr. vs. People

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

G.R. No. 138033. February 22, 2006.

VOL. 483, FEBRUARY 22, 2006

circumstances: (1) By using force or intimidation; (2) When the woman is

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED