Lawyerly

GR No. 208760

2014-04-23

MENDOZA, J.

The absence of hymenal laceration on AAA and the finding of a shallow vaginal laceration on BBB are not fatal to the cause of the prosecution. The Court has repeatedly held that the presence of hymenal rapture, vaginal laceration or any genital injury is not indispensable because the same is not an element of the crime of rape.[17] In the same breath, an intact hymen does not negate the finding that the victim was raped.[18] The alleged inconsistencies in the testimonies of AAA and BBB cannot exculpate him either. Obviously, the inconsistencies referred to are trivial and only pertained to inconsequential matters that do not alter the essential fact of the commission of rape. What is decisive in a rape charge is that the commission of rape has been sufficiently proven. Inconsistencies and discrepancies as to minor matters which are irrelevant to the elements of the crime cannot be considered grounds for acquittal.[19]

GR No. 202060

2013-12-11

PEOPLE v. FERDINAND BANZUELA

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

'[C]arnal knowledge,' unlike its ordinary connotation of sexual intercourse, does not necessarily require that the vagina be penetrated or that the hymen be ruptured. The crime of rape is deemed consummated even when the man's penis merely enters the labia or lips of the female organ or, as once so said in a case, by the 'mere touching of the external genitalia by a penis capable of consummating the sexual act.[43] (Citations omitted.)

GR No. 183090

2011-11-14

PEOPLE v. BERNABE PANGILINAN Y CRISOSTOMO

PERALTA, J.

Indeed, AAA testified in her redirect examination that appellant had inserted his organ into her vagina and that it was painful when appellant did it. It was the penetration that caused the pain. We held that rape is committed on the victim's testimony that she felt pain.[48] This, at least, could be nothing but the result of penile penetration sufficient to constitute rape.[49] Rape is committed even with the slightest penetration of the woman's sex organ.[50]

GR No. 181900

2010-10-20

PEOPLE v. DEMETRIO SALAZAR

VELASCO JR., J.

In order for the accused to be found guilty of the crime of statutory rape in this jurisdiction, the Court held in People v. Tampos[31] that two (2) elements must concur: (1) that the offender had carnal knowledge of the victim; and (2) that the victim is below twelve (12) years old, thus: The two elements of statutory rape are: (1) that the accused had carnal knowledge of a woman; and (2) that the woman is below 12 years of age. Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code is now in Article 266-A, par. 1-d, in view of the amendments introduced by R.A. 8353. Statutory rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under par. d, "when the offended party is under 12 years of age."

GR No. 168693

2009-06-19

PEOPLE v. JESSIE MARIANO

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.

Q: Doctor, suppose that the male erect penis is too small, could it cause the injury you have found? A: If it is a small organ, it is possible as long as the organ is as large as a fully grown adult finger.[13] We find that the medical findings of Dr. Bandonil are not incompatible with the victim's claim of rape. He categorically declared that the possible cause for the swelling of the victim's hymen could be the male organ which would connote that accused-appellant's penis indeed touched the labia of AAA's organ. The mere touching by the male organ of the labia of the pudendum of the woman's private part is sufficient to consummate rape.[14] The fact that there was no deep penetration of the victim's vagina and that her hymen was intact does not negate rape, since this crime is committed even with the slightest penetration of a woman's sex organ.[15] Significantly, in a number of cases, we held that where penetration was not fully established, the Court had anchored its conclusion that the rape was nevertheless committed on the victim's testimony that she felt pain.[16] Here, AAA repeatedly testified that accused-appellant inserted his penis into her vagina as a consequence of which she felt pain.[17] Her testimony has established without a doubt that accused-appellant's penis managed to come into contact with her vagina. This, at least, could be nothing but the result of the penile penetration sufficient to constitute rape.

GR No. 174065

2009-02-18

PEOPLE v. ROLLY CANARES Y ALMANARES

BRION, J.

Q: You mean he was able to insert his penis into your vagina? A: Yes, sir.[63] Parenthetically, the pain that AAA said she suffered is, in itself, an indicator of the commission of rape. We so held in People v. Tampos[64] and People v. Borromeo.[65] There is the added element, too, that AAA's testimony is supported by physical and supporting testimonial evidence. There was the healed laceration found in her hymen which is remarkably compatible with her claim of sexual molestation. Dr. Madrid, in testifying on the healed laceration, stated that it could have been caused by a penis.[66]

GR No. 175333

2007-09-21

PEOPLE v. SONNY RENTORIA Y VELASCO

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

From the above provisions of the law, there is rape when an accused has sexual intercourse with a victim "under twelve years of age" even if any of the circumstances enumerated under paragraph (1) is absent. This is called Statutory Rape.[26] And under the terms of Article 266-B of the same law, to wit -

GR NO. 168476

2006-09-27

PEOPLE v. CHARLIE GLORIA

AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.

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. (Emphasis supplied) The phrase "under twelve years of age" makes the offense Statutory Rape,[41] and is punishable by reclusion perpetua under Art. 266-B of the Revised Penal Code. Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, however, also states that the death penalty shall be imposed in the crime of rape if any of the aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 266-B is present. Aggravating/qualifying circumstances are circumstances that change the nature of the crime when these circumstances are present in the commission of the crime. Particularly, qualifying circumstances are aggravating circumstances, which, by express provision of law, change the nature of the crime to a higher category. In this case, such qualifying circumstance is that the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent of the victim.[42] The presence of the foregoing qualifying circumstance raised the crime of Statutory Rape to Qualified Rape. Simply stated, under the circumstances obtaining in this case, Qualified Rape is Statutory Rape in its qualified form.

GR No. 150501

2004-06-03

PEOPLE v. GERONIMO BOROMEO Y MARCO

PER CURIAM

Proof of hymenal laceration is not an element of rape.[23] An intact hymen does not negate a finding that the victim was raped.[24] To sustain a conviction for rape, full penetration of the female genital organ is not necessary. It is enough that there is proof of entry of the male organ into the labia of the pudendum of the female organ. Penetration of the penis by entry into the lips of the vagina, even without laceration of the hymen, is enough to constitute rape,[25] and even the briefest of contact is deemed rape.[26] As long as the attempt to insert the penis results in contact with the lips of the vagina, even without rupture or laceration of the hymen, the rape is consummated.[27] In People v. Tampos,[28] this Court held that rape is committed on the victim's testimony that she felt pain.

GR No. 142887

2004-03-02

PEOPLE v. RODRIGO PACHECO Y CASTILLO

QUISUMBING, J.

Findings of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies are generally accorded great respect by an appellate court.[29] This is because the trial court had the first-hand opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses on the stand and assess their credibility.[30] We note that while testifying, private complainant broke down in tears several times because of her fear of the appellant.[31] The crying of a victim during her testimony is eloquent evidence of the credibility of the rape charge with the verity born out of human nature and experience.[32]

	GR No. 208760 2014-04-23	PEOPLE v. FLORO BUBAN BARCELA MENDOZA, J.
The absence of hymenal laceration on AAA and the finding of a shallow vaginal laceration on BBB are not fatal to the cause of the prosecution. The Court has repeatedly held that the presence of hymenal rapture, vaginal laceration or any genital injury is not indispensable because the same is not an element of the crime of rape.[17] In the same breath, an intact hymen does not negate the finding that the victim was raped.[18] The alleged inconsistencies in the testimonies of AAA and BBB cannot exculpate him either. Obviously, the inconsistencies referred to are trivial and only pertained to inconsequential matters that do not alter the essential fact of the commission of rape. What is decisive in a rape charge is that the commission of rape has been sufficiently proven. Inconsistencies and discrepancies as to minor matters which are irrelevant to the elements of the crime cannot be considered grounds for acquittal.[19]
	GR No. 202060 2013-12-11	PEOPLE v. FERDINAND BANZUELA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
'[C]arnal knowledge,' unlike its ordinary connotation of sexual intercourse, does not necessarily require that the vagina be penetrated or that the hymen be ruptured. The crime of rape is deemed consummated even when the man's penis merely enters the labia or lips of the female organ or, as once so said in a case, by the 'mere touching of the external genitalia by a penis capable of consummating the sexual act.[43] (Citations omitted.)
	GR No. 183090 2011-11-14	PEOPLE v. BERNABE PANGILINAN Y CRISOSTOMO PERALTA, J.
Indeed, AAA testified in her redirect examination that appellant had inserted his organ into her vagina and that it was painful when appellant did it. It was the penetration that caused the pain. We held that rape is committed on the victim's testimony that she felt pain.[48] This, at least, could be nothing but the result of penile penetration sufficient to constitute rape.[49] Rape is committed even with the slightest penetration of the woman's sex organ.[50]
	GR No. 181900 2010-10-20	PEOPLE v. DEMETRIO SALAZAR VELASCO JR., J.
In order for the accused to be found guilty of the crime of statutory rape in this jurisdiction, the Court held in People v. Tampos[31] that two (2) elements must concur: (1) that the offender had carnal knowledge of the victim; and (2) that the victim is below twelve (12) years old, thus: The two elements of statutory rape are: (1) that the accused had carnal knowledge of a woman; and (2) that the woman is below 12 years of age. Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code is now in Article 266-A, par. 1-d, in view of the amendments introduced by R.A. 8353. Statutory rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under par. d, "when the offended party is under 12 years of age."
	GR No. 168693 2009-06-19	PEOPLE v. JESSIE MARIANO LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Q: Doctor, suppose that the male erect penis is too small, could it cause the injury you have found? A: If it is a small organ, it is possible as long as the organ is as large as a fully grown adult finger.[13] We find that the medical findings of Dr. Bandonil are not incompatible with the victim's claim of rape. He categorically declared that the possible cause for the swelling of the victim's hymen could be the male organ which would connote that accused-appellant's penis indeed touched the labia of AAA's organ. The mere touching by the male organ of the labia of the pudendum of the woman's private part is sufficient to consummate rape.[14] The fact that there was no deep penetration of the victim's vagina and that her hymen was intact does not negate rape, since this crime is committed even with the slightest penetration of a woman's sex organ.[15] Significantly, in a number of cases, we held that where penetration was not fully established, the Court had anchored its conclusion that the rape was nevertheless committed on the victim's testimony that she felt pain.[16] Here, AAA repeatedly testified that accused-appellant inserted his penis into her vagina as a consequence of which she felt pain.[17] Her testimony has established without a doubt that accused-appellant's penis managed to come into contact with her vagina. This, at least, could be nothing but the result of the penile penetration sufficient to constitute rape.
	GR No. 174065 2009-02-18	PEOPLE v. ROLLY CANARES Y ALMANARES BRION, J.
Q: You mean he was able to insert his penis into your vagina? A: Yes, sir.[63] Parenthetically, the pain that AAA said she suffered is, in itself, an indicator of the commission of rape. We so held in People v. Tampos[64] and People v. Borromeo.[65] There is the added element, too, that AAA's testimony is supported by physical and supporting testimonial evidence. There was the healed laceration found in her hymen which is remarkably compatible with her claim of sexual molestation. Dr. Madrid, in testifying on the healed laceration, stated that it could have been caused by a penis.[66]
	GR No. 175333 2007-09-21	PEOPLE v. SONNY RENTORIA Y VELASCO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
From the above provisions of the law, there is rape when an accused has sexual intercourse with a victim "under twelve years of age" even if any of the circumstances enumerated under paragraph (1) is absent. This is called Statutory Rape.[26] And under the terms of Article 266-B of the same law, to wit -
	GR NO. 168476 2006-09-27	PEOPLE v. CHARLIE GLORIA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
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. (Emphasis supplied) The phrase "under twelve years of age" makes the offense Statutory Rape,[41] and is punishable by reclusion perpetua under Art. 266-B of the Revised Penal Code. Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code, however, also states that the death penalty shall be imposed in the crime of rape if any of the aggravating/qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 266-B is present. Aggravating/qualifying circumstances are circumstances that change the nature of the crime when these circumstances are present in the commission of the crime. Particularly, qualifying circumstances are aggravating circumstances, which, by express provision of law, change the nature of the crime to a higher category. In this case, such qualifying circumstance is that the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent of the victim.[42] The presence of the foregoing qualifying circumstance raised the crime of Statutory Rape to Qualified Rape. Simply stated, under the circumstances obtaining in this case, Qualified Rape is Statutory Rape in its qualified form.
	GR No. 150501 2004-06-03	PEOPLE v. GERONIMO BOROMEO Y MARCO PER CURIAM
Proof of hymenal laceration is not an element of rape.[23] An intact hymen does not negate a finding that the victim was raped.[24] To sustain a conviction for rape, full penetration of the female genital organ is not necessary. It is enough that there is proof of entry of the male organ into the labia of the pudendum of the female organ. Penetration of the penis by entry into the lips of the vagina, even without laceration of the hymen, is enough to constitute rape,[25] and even the briefest of contact is deemed rape.[26] As long as the attempt to insert the penis results in contact with the lips of the vagina, even without rupture or laceration of the hymen, the rape is consummated.[27] In People v. Tampos,[28] this Court held that rape is committed on the victim's testimony that she felt pain.
	GR No. 142887 2004-03-02	PEOPLE v. RODRIGO PACHECO Y CASTILLO QUISUMBING, J.
Findings of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies are generally accorded great respect by an appellate court.[29] This is because the trial court had the first-hand opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses on the stand and assess their credibility.[30] We note that while testifying, private complainant broke down in tears several times because of her fear of the appellant.[31] The crying of a victim during her testimony is eloquent evidence of the credibility of the rape charge with the verity born out of human nature and experience.[32]

PEOPLE v. ROBERTO TAMPOS Y AGUSTIN