People v.

Orita

Lessons Applicable: No frustrated rape

Laws Applicable: Art. 6

FACTS:
• March 20, 1983 Early Morning: Cristina S. Abayan, 19-year old freshman student at the St. Joseph's College, arrived
at her boarding house after her classmates brought her home from a party. She knocked at the door of her boarding
house when a frequent visitor of another boarder held her and poked a knife to her neck. Despite pleading for her
release, he ordered her to go upstairs with him. Since the door which led to the 1st floor was locked from the inside, they
used the back door to the second floor. With his left arm wrapped around her neck and his right hand poking a "balisong"
to her neck, he dragged her up the stairs. When they reached the second floor, he commanded her with the knife poked
at her neck, to look for a room. They entered Abayan's room. He then pushed her hitting her head on the wall. With one
hand holding the knife, he undressed himself. He then ordered her to take off her clothes. Scared, she took off her T-shirt,
bra, pants and panty. He ordered her to lie down on the floor and then mounted her. He made her hold his penis and
insert it in her vagina. Still poked with a knife, she did as told but since she kept moving, only a portion of his penis
entered her. He then laid down on his back and commanded her to mount him. Still only a small part of his penis was
inserted into her vagina. When he had both his hands flat on the floor. She dashed out to the next room and locked
herself in. When he pursued her and climbed the partition, she ran to another room then another then she jumped out
through a window.

• Still naked, she darted to the municipal building, 18 meters in front of the boarding house and knocked on the door.
When there was no answer, she ran around the building and knocked on the back door. When the policemen who were
inside the building opened the door, they found her naked sitting on the stairs crying. Pat. Donceras, took off his jacket
and wrapped it around her. Pat. Donceras and two other policemen rushed to the boarding house where they heard and
saw somebody running away but failed to apprehend him due to darkness. She was taken to Eastern Samar Provincial
Hospital where she was physically examined.
• Her vulva had no abrasions or discharges.
• RTC: frustrated rape

ISSUE: W/N there is frustrated rape.

HELD: NO. RTC MODIFIED. guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and sentenced to reclusion perpetua as
well as to indemnify the victim in the amount of P30,000
• Correlating Art. 335 and Art. 6, there is no debate that the attempted and consummated stages apply to the crime of
rape.
• Requisites of a frustrated felony are:
o (1) that the offender has performed all the acts of execution which would produce the felony
o (2) that the felony is not produced due to causes independent of the perpetrator's will
• attempted crime the purpose of the offender must be thwarted by a foreign force or agency which intervenes and
compels him to stop prior to the moment when he has performed all of the acts which should produce the crime as a
consequence, which acts it is his intention to perform
o If he has performed all of the acts which should result in the consummation of the crime and voluntarily desists from
proceeding further, it can not be an attempt.
• in the crime of rape, from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim he actually attains his purpose
and, from that moment also all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished. Any penetration of the
female organ by the male organ is sufficient. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ, without rupture of the hymen or
laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction. Necessarily, rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the
female organ
• The fact is that in a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted even on the sole basis of the victim's
testimony if credible. Dr. Zamora did not rule out penetration of the genital organ of the victim.

People v. Orita
G.R. No. 88724, April 3, 1990
Medialdea, J. / KMD

SUBJECT MATTER: Criminal liability; stages of commission; specific felonies; rape

CASE SUMMARY:
In People v. Orita, Orita was convicted of frustrated rape, however the SC ruled that he should be convicted of
consummated rape because Orita actually attained his purpose and, from that moment also all the essential elements of
the offense have been accomplished, thus consummated. The SC also ruled that full penetration is not essential in the
consummation of rape. It is also hardly conceivable how the frustrated stage in rape can ever be committed.

DOCTRINES:
ART. 335 When and how rape is committed - Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of 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, even though neither of the circumstances mentioned in the
two next preceding paragraphs shall be present. 


ART. 6 Consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies - Consummated felonies as well as those which are frustrated
and attempted, are punishable.
A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present; and it is
frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but
which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.

There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not
perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his
own spontaneous desistance.”

The requisites of a frustrated felony are:

(1) that the offender has performed all the acts of execution which would produce the felony and
(2) that the felony is not produced due to causes independent of the perpetrator’s will.

FACTS:
 Complainant, Cristina S. Abayan was a 19-year old college student in Borongan, Eastern Samar while appellant
was a Philippine Constabulary (PC) soldier.
 In the early morning of March 20, 1983, complainant just arrived at her boarding house from a party when
somebody held her and poked a knife to her neck. He ordered her to go upstairs and when they reached the
second floor, he commanded her to look for a room. Upon entering the room, he then ordered complainant to
take off her clothes. Scared, she took off her T-shirt. Then he pulled off her bra, pants and panty, He then
mounted her appellant but could not fully penetrate her so he commanded her to mount him, allowing only a
small part [again] of his penis to penetrate into her vagina.
 Complainant dashed out of the room naked and darted further to the municipal building. Pat. Donceras and other
policemen, who were inside the building opened the door and found complainant naked sitting on the stairs
crying. They brought her to the Eastern Samar Provincial Hospital where she was physically examined by Dr.
Abude, while the rest went to the boarding house and saw somebody running away.
 Based on the physical examination:
o Patient came in in a state of shock
o circumscribed hematoma at anterior neck
o linear abrasions below left breast
o multiple pinpoint marks at the back, abrasions at both knees
o no visible abrasions or marks at the perineal area or over the vulva; erythematous areas noted surrounding
vaginal orifice, tender; hymen intact; no laceration (fresh and old); examining finger can barely enter and
with difficulty; vaginal canal tight; no discharges noted.
The accused was charged with the crime of frustrated rape before the Regional Trial Court, Branch II, Borongan, Eastern
Samar, and sentenced to an imprisonment of 10 years and 1 day, Prision Mayor, as minimum to 12 years Prision Mayor,
maximum; to indemnify CRISTINA S. ABAYAN PhP 4,000.00, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and
to pay costs.

The accused assails the testimonies of the victim and Pat. Donceras because they show remarkable and vital
inconsistencies and its incredibility amounting to fabrication and therefore casted doubt to its candor, truth and validity.

ISSUE/S:
1) WON the trial court erred in disregarding the substantial inconsistencies in the testimonies of the witnesses.

2) WON the trial court erred in declaring that the crime of frustrated rape was committed by the accused. (YES)
HOLDING:

1. No, the trial court did not err in disregarding the substantial inconsistencies in the testimonies of the witnesses.
the alleged inconsistencies revealed that they refer to trivial inconsistencies which are not sufficient to blur or cast
doubt on the witnesses’ straightforward attestations. Far from being badges of fabrication, the inconsistencies in
their testimonies may in fact be justifiably considered as manifestations of truthfulness on material points. These
little deviations also confirm that the witnesses had not been rehearsed. The most candid witnesses may make
mistakes sometimes but such honest lapses do not necessarily impair their intrinsic credibility (People v. Cabato,
G.R. No. L- 37400, April 15, 1988, 160 SCRA 98).

The court found no cogent reason to depart from the well-settled rule that the findings of fact of the trial court on
the credibility of witnesses should be accorded the highest respect because it has the advantage of observing the
demeanor of witnesses and can discern if a witness is telling the truth (People v. Samson, G.R. No. 55520,
August 25, 1989).

2. Yes, the charge should be rape, instead of frustrated rape. Clearly, in the crime of rape, from the moment the
offender has carnal knowledge of his victim, he actually attains his purpose and, from that moment also all the
essential elements of the offense have been accomplished. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender,
because he has performed the last act necessary to produce the crime. Thus, the felony is consummated. In a
long line of cases (People v. Oscar, 48 Phil. 527; People v. Hernandez, 49 Phil. 980; People v. Royeras, G.R.
No. L-31886, April 29, 1974, 56 SCRA 666; People v. Amores, G.R. No. L-32996, August 21, 1974, 58 SCRA
505), the court have set the uniform rule that for the consummation of rape, perfect penetration is not essential.
Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ,
without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction.

Necessarily, rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the female organ (People v. Tayaba, 62 Phil. 559;
People v. Rabadan, et al., 53 Phil. 694; United States v. Garcia, 9 Phil. 434) because not all acts of execution
was performed. The offender merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts. Taking into
account the nature, elements and manner of execution of the crime of rape and jurisprudence on the matter, it is
hardly conceivable how the frustrated stage in rape can ever be committed.

Decision of the Regional Trial Court is hereby MODIFIED. The accused Ceilito Orita is hereby found guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and sentenced to reclusion perpetua as well as to indemnify the
victim in the amount of P30,000.00.

ADELMO PEREZ (petitioner) v CA and People of the Philippines (respondent)

GR No. 143838 ǀKAPUNANǀMay 9, 2002

DOCTRINE: Difference of frustrated rape and acts of lasciviousness

NATURE: Petition for review on certiorari on previous Court’s decision affirming conviction of Perez for crime of
attempted rape
FACTS:
 On April 14, 1988, Perez entered the room of Julita Tria (victim) and embraced and kissed her on the neck, held
and mashed her breast, and compelled her to lie down, and thereafter kissed her lips and neck and with the
intent of having sex with her, touched her sex organ and tried to remove her panties thereby commissioning the
crime of rape directly by overt acts but did not accomplish having sex with her because Julita Tria succeeded in
resisting his attempt and also because victim’s mother arrived.
 Trial court rendered the judgment finding the Perez guilty of attempted rape. This decision was reaffirmed by the
CA.
ISSUE: W/N crime committed was attempted rape?
HELD: NO. The SC held that the crime committed, though obscene and detestable acts, do not constitute attempted rape
absent any showing that petitioner actually commenced to force his penis into complainant’s sexual organ.
RATIO:
Under Article 6 of the RPC, there is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by
overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or
accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. In the crime of rape, penetration is an essential act of execution to
produce the felony. Thus, for there to be an attempted rape, the accused must have commenced the act of penetrating
his sexual organ to the vagina of the victim but for some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance,
the penetration, however slight, is not completed.
In the case at bar, there is no showing that petitioner’s sexual organ had even touched complainant’s vagina nor any part
of her body. All the elements of acts of lasciviousness were also satisfied- (1) that the offender commits any act of
lasciviousness or lewdness; (2) that it is done (a) by using force and intimidation or (b) when the offended party is
deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or (c) when the offended party is under 12 years of age; and (3) that the
offended party is another person of either sex.

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

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

People vs. Egan (GR No. 139338)

Facts:

Lito Egan, alias Akiao, 36 years old, a Manobo was an avid admirer of a fellow Manobo, Lenie Camad, 12 years old.
Both are residents of Sitio Salaysay, Marilog, Davao City.

On 6 January 1997, the accused appeared from nowhere and forcibly dragged and pushed Lenie towards Sition
Dalag, Arakan, Cotabato. He threatened Lenie that he would kill her should the latter resisted.

Jessica, the cousin of Lenie, who witnessed the abduction, informed Palmones Camad, the father of Lenie regarding
the incident.

For four (4) months, the datus attempted a customary settlement of the abduction in accordance with Manobo
traditions. In exchange of the hand of Lenie in marriage, the accused agreed to give 2 horses to the family of Lenie. When the
accused failed to fulfill his promise, the father demanded the unconditional return of his daughter to his custody.

Since the amicable settlement was not realized, Akiao forcibly relocated Lenie to Cabalantian, Kataotao, Bukidnon,
where the latter was successfully rescued on 15 May 1997.

An Information for Forcible Abduction with Rape was filed against the accused. After several warrants of arrest and
attempts to arrest him, he was finally arrested at Arakan, Cotabato.

The accused pleaded not guilty to the crime charged. During the trial, accused tried to prove that he and Lenie had
actually been living together under Manobo rites in the house of her father after he has given the family, the dowry. The
accused allegedly delivered the horse to the father, but was again refused when the latter increased the number of horses
from one to two. The accused concluded that because he failed to deliver two wild horses, the instant case was filed against
him.

The trial court rejected the defenses of the accused and convicted him of forcible abduction with rape. The accused
appealed the decision of the trial court.

Issue:

Between the accused and the victim, whose version is more credible, more plausible and more trustworthy
considering the circumstances surrounding the commission of the crime charged?

Decision:

All the elements of forcible abduction were proved in this case. The victim who is a young girl was taken against her
will as shown by the fact that at knife-point, she was dragged and taken by accused-appellant to a place far from her abode.
At her tender age, she could not be expected to physically resist considering the fact that even her companion, Jessica, had
to run home to escape accused- appellant’s wrath as he brandished a haunting knife.

The evidence likewise shows that the taking of the young victim against her will was done con miras deshonestas or
in furtherance of lewd and unchaste designs. The word lewd is defined as obscene, lustful, indecent, lascivious,
lecherous. It signifies that form of immorality which has relation to moral impurity; or that which is carried on in a wanton
manner. Such lewd designs were established by the prurient and lustful acts which accused-appellant displayed towards the
victim after she was abducted. This element may also be inferred from the fact that while Lenie was then a naive twelve
(12)-year old, accused-appellant was thirty-six (36) years old and although unmarried was much wiser in the ways of the
world than she

Given the straightforward and candid testimony of Lenie and her father Palmones as well as the absence of any
motive to testify falsely against accused-appellant, the logical conclusion is that there was no improper motive on their part,
and their respective testimonies as to facts proving forcible abduction are worthy of full faith and credit

Accused-appellant would however insist that he and Lenie had been engaged under Manobo rituals to marry
each other and that her companionship was willful and voluntary. Proof of this, he said, was the alleged dowry of one (1)
horse, two (2) pigs, ten (10) sacks of palay, and P2,000.00, with two (2) wild horses forthcoming, he had given her father
in exchange for her hand in marriage. In moving from one place to another to look for the horses which the old man
Palmones had demanded, it was allegedly only his intention to realize his matrimonial aspiration with Lenie.

The testimony of the victim negated this contrived posture of accused-appellant which in reality is simply a
variation of the sweetheart defense. If they were, surely, Lenie would not have jeopardized their relationship by accusing
him of having held her against her will and molesting her and, on top of it all, by filing a criminal charge against him. If it
had been so, Lenie could have easily told her father after the latter had successfully traced their whereabouts that
nothing untoward had happened between her and the accused. Her normal reaction would have been to cover-up for
the man she supposedly loved and with whom she had a passionate affair. But, on the contrary, Lenie lost no time in
denouncing accused-appellant and exposing to her family and the authorities the disgrace that had befallen her. If they
had indeed been lovers, Lenie's father would not have shown so much concern for her welfare and safety by searching
for the couple for four (4) months, desperately wanting to rescue her from captivity and seeking the intervention of
the datus in resolving the matter.

Under the circumstances, the criminal liability of accused-appellant is only for forcible abduction under Art. 342 of The
Revised Penal Code. The sexual abuse which accused-appellant forced upon Lenie constitutes the lewd design inherent in
forcible abduction and is thus absorbed therein. The indecent molestation cannot form the other half of a complex
crime since the record does not show that the principal purpose of the accused was to commit any of the crimes against
chastity and that her abduction would only be a necessary means to commit the same. Surely it would not have been the
case that accused-appellant would touch Lenie only once during her four (4)-month captivity, as she herself admitted, if his
chief or primordial intention had been to lay with her. Instead, what we discern from the evidence is that the intent to seduce
the girl forms part and parcel of her forcible abduction and shares equal importance with the other element of the crime which
was to remove the victim from her home or from whatever familiar place she may be and to take her to some other. Stated
otherwise, the intention of accused-appellant as the evidence shows was not only to seduce the victim but also to separate
her from her family, especially from her father Palmones, clearly tell-tale signs of forcible abduction

PEOPLE v. JIMMY SABREDO Y GARBO

GR No. 126114, May 11, 2000

FACTS:
imposing the penalty of death on accused-appellant, Jimmy Sabredo y Garbo, for the complex crime of abduction
with rape of complainant Judeliza Sabredo.

Appellant is the uncle of complainant. In 1993, Jimmy arrived from Masbate to reside with Judeliza's family in
Cagtagong, Caguyong, Borbon, Cebu, where he stayed with them for more than a year.
On June 27, 1994, Judeliza went to the well near their house, to take a bath. There, Jimmy grabbed and forcibly
dragged her at knife's point, to the highway where he made her board a truck for Bogo, Cebu. Impelled by fear, she
complied, since Jimmy continuously poked a knife under cover of his jacket at her. From Bogo, he took her by passenger
motorboat to Placer, Masbate.

On July 4, 1994, at around midnight, Jimmy, armed with a blade, sexually assaulted Judeliza. He covered her
mouth to prevent her from shouting. After satisfying his lust, Jimmy inserted three fingers into her vaginal orifice and
cruelly pinched it. Judeliza screamed and cried for help.

Contention of accused: Jimmy admitted having sexual relations with Judeliza, but insisted that it was consensual, he
claimed that they were lovers.

HELD:
It may appear at first blush that forcible abduction, as defined and penalized by Article 342 of the Revised Penal
Code was also committed, we are not totally disposed to convict appellant for the complex crime of forcible abduction
with rape. It is note that while the information sufficiently alleges the forcible taking of complainant from Cebu to Masbate,
the same fails to allege "lewd designs." When a complex crime under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code is charged,
such as forcible abduction with rape, it is axiomatic that the prosecution must allege and prove the presence of all the
elements of forcible abduction, as well as all the elements of the crime of rape. When appellant, using a blade, forcibly
took away complainant for the purpose of sexually assaulting her, as in fact he did rape her, the rape may then absorb
forcible abduction. Hence, the crime committed by appellant is simple rape only.

Babanto vs. Zosa

FACTS:

The victim, Leonida Dagohoy, a 13-year old girl of considerably low mentality, was seated in the market when
accused, Eusebio Babanto, a policeman, approached and held her right hand and brought her to the ABC Hall. There
was no one in the ABC Hall and it was dark. When they arrived there, accused made her lie down with her face upward.
While in that position, accused lifted the girl’s dress and removed her panty. The girl tried to kick him but he held her
down. The accused exposed his penis, laid down on top of the girl and commenced the sexual act. Afterwards, he
threatened to shoot her if she was going to tell her parents and left. The girl felt pain in her vagina which emitted blood.
She confided her ordeal to her mother after the latter observed her to be weak and feverish. Initially, accused was
charged with rape but the RTC found him guilty of the lesser offense of qualified seduction due to lack of violence or
intimidation.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the RTC erred in convicting accused of qualified seduction.

RULING:

Yes.

RATIO:

The complaint alleged that the accused abused his position as a policeman, that Leonida Dagohoy was of the
tender age of 13, and that the accused had carnal knowledge of the complainant. However, there is no allegation that the
complainant was a "virgin". It is true that virginity is presumed if the girl is over 12 and under 18 years of age, is
unmarried and of good reputation. The presumption notwithstanding, virginity is still an essential element of the crime of
qualified seduction and must be alleged in the complaint. A conviction for the crime of qualified seduction without the
allegation of virginity would violate the petitioner's right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against
him.

In the instant case, considering the age, mental abnormality, and deficiency of the complainant plus the fact that
the accused-petitioner was at the time of the incident in uniform and with a side arm, there was sufficient intimidation to
convict for rape. The fact that the complainant kicked the accused- petitioner while the latter was lifting her dress and
removing her panty and that she cried afterwards negate any consent on her part to the sexual intercourse.

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SERVILLANO VELASQUEZ, defendant-appellant.

Article 169

FACTS:

On the night of February 9, 1966, while complainant was sleeping in her room, appellant allegedly armed with a bladed
instrument, by means of force and intimidation, have carnal knowledge with the former against her will and consent.
Appellant again satisfied his lust by having sexual intercourse with the complainant in the next two succeeding days,
February 10 and 11, 1966.

After the incident, complainant told her employer that she wanted to leave, but the latter refused to let her go until a
replacement for her could be secured. On May 4, 1966, the mother of the complainant took her from the house of Cecilia
Velasquez and brought her home to barrio Linao, Licab Nueva Ecija. Sometime in August 1966, the mother of the
complainant noticed that she was not menstruating and that her abdomen was showing signs of pregnancy. The
complainant had to tell her mother as to what happened to her while she was working as a housemaid in the house of
Cecilia Velasquez.

On October 20, 1967 an information for rape was filed with the Court of First Instance of Nueva Ecija

The appellant denied that their first intercourse took place on February 9, 1966. He claimed that their first intercourse
occurred since the last week of January 1966, and was repeated several times thereafter, and the said encounters took
place in his shop at day time and never at night. He disclaimed being the father of the child of the complainant, pointing
out of the fact that from the date of his supposed last sexual intercourse with the complainant which, according to the
latter was on February 11, 1966, up to the delivery of the child on December 22, 1966, a period of ten months and eleven
days had elapsed, which renders it medically impossible for him to have been the father of the said child.

The trial court ruled that the crime committed by the appellant as shown by the evidence is that of qualified seduction,
upon its finding that the claim of the complainant of having been threatened or forced by the appellant in making her
submit to his sexual desire is not borne out by the evidence. The appeal by defendant-appellant to the Court of Appeals
was certified by it to the Supreme Court upon a finding that, as recommended by the Solicitor General, the accused
should have been found guilty of rape which is punishable by reclusion perpetua, but which penalty is beyond the
jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals to impose

ISSUE: W/N the appellant is guilty of the crime of rape

HELD:

No, appellant was acquitted of the charges.

Under Our laws, a child born after three hundred days from possible conception is not accorded any presumption either
of legitimacy or illegitimacy. Whoever alleges the paternity of the child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, must prove such
allegation. (Art. 261, Civil Code; Section 6, Rule 131, Rules of Court.)

The complainant delivered her child on December 22, 1966. If she was telling the truth that her last intercourse with the
appellant was on February 11, 1966, it would mean that her child was born at least ten months and eleven days after
conception. While We are not certain as to whether such circumstance is not a medical impossibility, it is undeniably
contrary to ordinary and normal experience and, as such, sufficient to cast a reasonable doubt as to its credibility.

It is accordingly believed that the sexual intercourses between the complainant and the appellant did not terminate on
February 11, 1966, as averred by the complainant, but continued for several times thereafter as asserted by the
appellant. The accused is acquitted of the charge

Characters:

Servillano Velasquez: Appellant, Owns radio repair shop in the ground floor of Cecilia’s house

Cecilia Velasquez: Appellants’s sister, Complainant’s employer

Remedios Domingo: Complainant, Housemaid of Cecilia Velasquez, 15 years, 2 months and 27 days old
Setting: Cecilia Velasquez’s house, Licab Nueva Ecija

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee,

vs.

EDGAR JUMAWAN, Accused-Appellant.

G.R. No. 187495 April 21, 2014

PONENTE: Reyes

TOPIC: Marital rape

FACTS:

Accused-appellant and his wife, KKK, were married and have four children.

On February 19, 1999, KKK executed a Complaint-Affidavit, alleging that her husband, the accused-appellant,
raped her at 3 :00 a.m. of December 3, 1998 at their residence in Cagayan de Oro City, and that on December 12, 1998,
the accused-appellant boxed her shoulder for refusing to have sex with him.

As to the charge of rape according to KKK, conjugal intimacy did not really cause marital problems between her
and the accused-appellant. It was, in fact, both frequent and fulfilling. He treated her well and she, of course, responded
with equal degree of enthusiasm. However, in 1997, he started to be brutal in bed. He would immediately remove her
panties and, sans any foreplay, insert her penis in her vagina. His abridged method of lovemaking was physically painful
for her so she would resist his sexual ambush but he would threaten her into submission.

One night, in the spouse’s bedroom, KKK changed into a daster and fixed the matrimonial bed but she did not
lie thereon with the accused-appellant and instead, rested separately in a cot near the bed. Her reclusive behavior
prompted him to ask angrily: “Why are you lying on the cot?”, and to instantaneously order: “You transfer here to our
bed.”

KKK insisted to stay on the cot and explained that she had headache and abdominal pain due to her
forthcoming menstruation. Her reasons did not appease him and he got angrier. He rose from the bed, lifted the cot and
threw it against the wall causing KKK to fall on the floor. Terrified, KKK stood up from where she fell, took her pillow and
transferred to the bed.

The accused-appellant then lay beside KKK and not before long, expressed his desire to copulate with her by
tapping his fingers on her lap. She politely declined by warding off his hand and reiterating that she was not feeling well.

The accused-appellant again asserted his sexual yearning and when KKK tried to resist by holding on to her
panties, he pulled them down so forcefully they tore on the sides. KKK stayed defiant by refusing to bend her legs.

The accused-appellant then raised KKK’s daster,41 stretched her legs apart and rested his own legs on them.
She tried to wrestle him away but he held her hands and succeeded in penetrating her. As he was carrying out his carnal
desires, KKK continued to protest by desperately shouting: “Don ‘t do that to me because I’m not feeling well.”

Accused raised the defense of denial and alleged that KKK merely fabricated the rape charges as her revenge
because he took over the control and management of their businesses, and to cover up her extra-marital affairs.

ISSUE:

Whether or not there can be a marital rape.

HELD:
 YES. The Supreme Court held that husbands do not have property rights over their wives’ bodies. Sexual
intercourse, albeit within the realm of marriage, if not consensual, is rape.

Violation of equal protection clause

The Court ruled that to treat marital rape cases differently from non-marital rape cases in terms of the elements
that constitute the crime and in the rules for their proof, infringes on the equal protection clause.

The Court found that there is no rational basis for distinguishing between marital rape and non-marital rape.
The various rationales which have been asserted in defense of the exemption are either based upon archaic notions
about the consent and property rights incident to marriage or are simply unable to withstand even the slightest scrutiny.

The Court declared the marital exemption for rape in the New York statute to be unconstitutional.

Said exemption states that a husband was endowed with absolute immunity from prosecution for the rape of his
wife. The privilege was personal and pertained to him alone. He had the marital right to rape his wife but he will be liable
when he aids or abets another person in raping her.

Moreover, Section 1 of RA 8353 penalizes the crime without regard to the rapist’s legal relationship with his
victim.

Implied consent theory untenable

The Court also ruled against the application of implied consent theory which was raised by the accused. The
accused argued that consent to copulation is presumed between cohabiting husband and wifeunless the contrary is
proved.

According to the Court, it is now acknowledged that rape, as a form of sexual violence, exists within marriage.
A man who penetrates her wife without her consent or against her will commits sexual violence upon her, and the
Philippines, as a State Party to the CEDAW and its accompanying Declaration, defines and penalizes the act as rape
under R.A. No. 8353.

People of the Philippines v. Edgar Jumawan

G.R. No. 187495, April 21, 2014

Facts:

On October 16, 1998, the accused-appellant, his wife KKK and their children went about their nightly routine. Soon after,
the accused-appellant fetched KKK and bid her to come with him to their conjugal bedroom in the third floor of the house.
KKK complied. Once in the bedroom, KKK changed into a daster and fixed the matrimonial bed but she did not lie
thereon with the accused-appellant and instead, rested separately in a cot near the bed. He initially ordered her to sleep
beside him in their conjugal bed by violently throwing the cot where she was resting. In order not to aggravate his temper,
KKK obeyed. On the bed, he insinuated for them to have sex. When she rejected his advances due to abdominal pain
and headache, his request for intimacy transformed into a stubborn demand. KKK held her panties but the accused-
appellant forcibly pulled them down causing it to tear apart. She was not feeling well so she begged him to stop. He
flexed her two legs apart, gripped her hands, mounted her, rested his own legs on hers and succeeded in having sexual
intercourse with her.

On October 17, 1998, after the appalling episode in the conjugal bedroom the previous night, KKK decided to sleep in the
children's bedroom. The accused-appellant barged into the room and berated her for refusing to go with him to their
conjugal bedroom. When KKK insisted to stay in the children's bedroom, the accused-appellant got angry and pulled her
up. MMM's attempt to pacify the accused-appellant further enraged him. He ordered the children to go out of the room
and thereafter proceeded to force KKK into sexual intercourse. He forcibly pulled down her short pants and p anties as
KKK begged that her body is aching and that she cannot withstand sex. The accused-appellant removed his shorts and
briefs, spread KKK's legs apart, held her hands, mounted her and succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her.

The trial court convicted him. The CA affirmed the trial court’s decision.
Issues:

1. Whether or not the accused-appellant can be acquitted based on the irrevocable implied consent theory (that
consent to copulation is presumed between cohabiting husband and wife unless the contrary is proved)
2. Whether or not the standards for determining the presence of consent or lack thereof be adjusted on the ground
that sexual community is a mutual right and obligation between husband and wife

Ruling:

1. No. The ancient customs and ideologies from which the irrevocable implied consent theory evolved have
already been superseded by modem global principles on the equality of rights between men and women
and respect for human dignity established in various international conventions, such as the CEDAW. The
Philippines, as State Party to the CEDAW, recognized that a change in the traditional role of men as well as the
role of women in society and in the family is needed to achieve full equality between them. Accordingly, the
country vowed to take all appropriate measures to modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and
women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices, customs and all other practices which are based
on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women.
One of such measures is R.A. No 8353 insofar as it eradicated the archaic notion that marital rape cannot exist
because a husband has absolute proprietary rights over his wife's body and thus her consent to every act of
sexual intimacy with him is always obligatory or at least, presumed.
2. No. To treat marital rape cases differently from non-marital rape cases in terms of the elements that constitute
the crime and in the rules for their proof, infringes on the equal protection clause. The Constitutional right to
equal protection of the laws ordains that similar subjects should not be treated differently, so as to give
undue favor to some and unjustly discriminate against others; no person or class of persons shall be denied the
same protection of laws, which is enjoyed, by other persons or other classes in like circumstances.