NAGA COLLEGE FOUNDATION, INC.

M.T. Villanueva Avenue, Naga City

College of Criminal Justice Education

“RESEARCH ON RAPE CASES”

Group 1:

Members:
Abellada, Rence
Aguirre, Gerald
Asaytono, Mikylla
Atienza, Jessica
Baile, Luke
Balaquiao, Faith
Bibon, Darenz
Candelaria, Josh Uriel
Corral, Gina
Dualin, Carlo
Evangelista, Christabel
Gata, Richelle Mae
Matos, Kervin
Mendoza, Arjen
Menes, Tristan Jay
Mina, Richmond
Muños, Samantha Gaile

Dennis A. Vargas LLB, RCrim

Professor
Title:
People of the Philippines vs Jerry Babayron

Case:
G.R. N.O. 102018
Decision Date:

Aug. 21,1997
Jerry Gabayron convicted of raping his minor daughter, Summer; Supreme Court affirmed,
citing credible testimony and irrelevance of hymenal injury, increasing moral damages.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 102018)

Facts:
1. The Nature of the Crime:
a. The court emphasized the heinous nature of the crime, highlighting the severity
of incestuous rape. This underscores the emotional and psychological trauma
inflicted on the victim.
b. The fact that the perpetrator was the victim's father adds a layer of betrayal and
violation of trust.
2. The Victim's Testimony:

a. Summer Gabayron's testimony was crucial. She provided a detailed account of

the repeated sexual abuse she suffered.
b. Her testimony included specific details about the incidents, such as the accused
coming home drunk, undressing her, and attempting penetration.
c. Her emotional response, crying in pain, was also considered significant.
d. The fact that she withheld the information for a significant amount of time, due to
threats, was taken into account.
3. Medical Evidence:
a. The medico-legal report indicated that Summer's hymen was intact, but her
vaginal orifice was small.
b. The court clarified that complete penetration is not required for a rape conviction.
Even slight penetration or contact with the labia is sufficient.
 c. The medical evidence was used to support the claim that even though complete
penetration may not have happened, contact was made, and pain was inflicted.

4. Defense Testimony:
a. Jerry Gabayron denied the accusations, claiming his estranged wife had ulterior
motives.

b. His defense also attempted to cast doubt on the victim's credibility and the
possibility of the crime occurring in the presence of others.
c. The defense presented witnesses to try to create doubt about the timeline, and
the victim’s testimony.
d. The defense attempted to use the fact that other possible crimes were not
charged, as proof of the current crime not happening.

5. The Family Dynamics:

a. The separation of the parents and their subsequent reconciliation played a role in
the court's analysis.

b. The court considered the mother's actions, such as filing an affidavit of

desistance, in evaluating her alleged motive.
c. The fact that the victim stayed with the father after the separation, was used to
counter the claim that the victim was being controlled by the mother.

Issues:
1. Credibility of Witnesses:
a. The court had to determine the credibility of Summer Gabayron's testimony
versus the accused's denials.
b. The court also had to assess the credibility of the defense witnesses and their
claims.

c. The court had to decide if the victim was acting of her own free will, or under
coercion.
2. Legal Definition of Rape:

a. The court had to clarify the legal definition of rape, specifically regarding the
requirement of penetration.
b. This involved interpreting relevant jurisprudence and medical evidence.

c. The court had to determine if the acts that were committed, met the legal
definition of rape.
 3. Circumstantial Evidence:
a. The court had to weigh circumstantial evidence, such as the mother's alleged
motive and the possibility of the crime occurring in the presence of others.
b. The court had to determine the weight of the lack of other rape charges, against
the accused.

4. Motive and Intent:

a. The court had to analyze the possible motives of the mother, and if those motives
would have caused her to have her daughter lie.

b. The court needed to determine the intent of the accused, and if his actions were
done with intent to commit rape.
Findings:

1. Credibility Assessment:
a. The court found Summer Gabayron's testimony to be credible, consistent, and
convincing.

b. The court rejected the accused's denials and the defense's attempts to cast
doubt on the victim's testimony.
c. The court found the defense witness's testimony to be lacking in credibility.

2. Legal Interpretation:
a. The court affirmed that even slight penetration or contact with the labia is
sufficient for a rape conviction.
b. The court emphasized that the absence of a ruptured hymen does not negate the
crime of rape.

3. Circumstantial Evidence Evaluation:

a. The court dismissed the defense's arguments regarding the mother's alleged
motive and the possibility of the crime occurring in the presence of others.

b. The court dismissed the argument that the lack of other rape charges, proved
that this rape did not happen.

4. Moral Damages:
a. The court increased the moral damages awarded to the victim, recognizing the
severe emotional and psychological trauma she suffered.
b. This increase reflected the court's condemnation of the heinous nature of the
crime.
 c. The court wanted to provide the victim with some monetary compensation for the
trauma inflicted.

5. The court’s understanding of child victims:

a. The court showed that it understands the difficulty that child victims have when
testifying.
b. The court showed that it understands that child victims may not always give
perfect testimony.
c. The court showed that it understands that child victims can be traumatized, and
that trauma can affect memory.

Reference:

https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/22/35068
Title:
People of the Philippine vs. Ceredon y Pagaran

Case:
G.R. No. 167179
Decision Date:

Jan. 28, 2008

Elmer Ceredon convicted of 10 counts of raping his minor sister, AAA, from 1995-2000; death
penalty reduced to reclusion perpetua due to R.A. 9346.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 167179)

Facts:
1. Parties and Nature of the Case
a. The People of the Philippines, as plaintiff-appellee, brought criminal charges
against Elmer Ceredon y Pagaran, the accused-appellant.
b. The case involves multiple counts (ten in all) of rape committed against the
accused’s youngest sister (referred to as AAA), an incestuous crime that shocks
public sensibility.

2. Chronology and Details of the Offenses

a. Multiple Criminal Informations filed under Criminal Cases Nos. 08-1296 to 08-
1305 allege that, between 1995 and 2000, the accused committed repeated acts
of rape against his sister.
b. The offenses were committed in the Municipality of Gattaran, Province of
Cagayan, often involving the use of a knife, threats, force, intimidation, and other
coercive means.
c. The acts included abduction within the confines of the accused’s residence and
other locations, where he undressed, gagged, tied, whipped, and forcibly
penetrated the victim.

3. Specific Incident Summaries

a. Criminal Case No. 08-1296 (1995):
b. The victim, AAA, was about ten years old when the accused, armed with a knife,
forcibly abducted her from her home while her brothers were present.
 c. After overcoming her initial resistance and using threats in her native language,
the accused gagged, whipped, tied, and brought her to a bed where he
committed the rape.
d. Criminal Cases Nos. 08-1297 to 08-1299 (1995):
e. Subsequent incidents occurring soon after the first charge in 1995 followed a
similar modus operandi wherein the victim was forcibly undressed, intimidated by
a knife, and raped on the same bed in the accused’s residence.
f. In each instance, the victim experienced extreme physical abuse and was
compelled not to report the incidents under threat of death.
g. Criminal Cases Nos. 08-1300 to 08-1302 (1995–1996):
h. The pattern of repeated rape continued with the victim aging from ten to eleven
years old.
i. The accused, using similar coercive measures including tying and threatening to
kill, raped the victim again in different settings within the family home, even after
the family relocated due to natural calamities.
j. Criminal Cases Nos. 08-1303 to 08-1304 (1998):
k. When the victim was approximately thirteen years old, two incidents of rape were
recorded where the accused once again used force and intimidation.
l. In both instances, the victim, isolated at home with the rest of her family away,
had no means of escape and endured the abuse.
m. Criminal Case No. 08-1305 (2000):
n. The final reported incident occurred on May 8, 2000, during the wake of the
father’s death, with the victim aged fifteen.
o. The accused, having his own residence nearby, forcibly intercepted the victim as
she was sent to feed the chickens, subdued her by physical force, and committed
the rape while threatening her life.

4. Court Proceedings and Related Events

a. The accused was arraigned before the Regional Trial Court in 2001 initially
pleading “not guilty” but later, with counsel’s assistance, changed his plea to
“guilty” on all ten counts.
b. Joint trial proceedings were conducted with the teacher of AAA and the victim
herself testifying, while no evidence was presented by the defense.
c. Confrontations occurred after the victim disclosed the repeated abuse to family
members and acquaintances, during which the accused admitted to multiple
counts of rape in a face-to-face confrontation with the victim and relatives.
d. The trial court rendered a judgment convicting the accused on all ten counts of
rape, initially sentencing him to the death penalty for each count.
 5. Subsequent Appellate and Statutory Developments
a. The automatic appeal was forwarded to the Supreme Court; however, on the
basis of People v. Mateo, the case was remanded for intermediate review by the
Court of Appeals (CA).
b. The CA affirmed the conviction with modifications:
c. The death penalty was replaced by reclusion perpetua following the repeal of the
Death Penalty Law (via Republic Act No. 9346).
d. The CA also modified the award of damages, granting private complainant civil
indemnity, moral damages (increased upon review), and exemplary damages.

Issues:

1. Allegation of an Improvident Plea of Guilt

a. The accused contended that his change of plea from “not guilty” to “guilty” was
not made with full understanding of its consequences, particularly the imposition
of the death penalty.
b. The issue revolved around whether the trial court conducted a sufficient
“searching inquiry” into the voluntariness and full comprehension of his plea.

2. Sufficiency of the Criminal Information

a. The accused argued that the Informations were defective for failing to specifically
establish with exact dates the commission of each rape.
b. The contention questioned whether the omission of precise dates compromised
the validity of the charges.

3. Imposition of the Death Penalty as Qualifying Circumstance

a. The accused maintained that even if his plea was not improvident, the imposition
of the death penalty in one of the criminal cases was error.
b. The argument also touched upon whether the qualifying circumstance of
relationship (being the victim’s brother) was properly alleged given the statutory
requirements.

4. Allegation on the Qualification of Incestuous Rape

a. It was further contended that the offense should not be elevated to warrant the
death penalty since the relationship qualification (sibling relationship) was not
explicitly detailed in terms required (i.e., within a specific degree of
consanguinity).
 b. The issue extended to whether layman’s terms sufficed for establishing the
qualifying circumstance.

Findings:

1. The appellant argues that his conviction stems from an "improvident plea of guilt,"
claiming that the trial court did not properly inform him about the implications of
changing his plea to guilty for a capital offense, particularly regarding the possibility of a
death penalty under R.A. No. 7659. He contends that he was not sufficiently aware of
the consequences during re-arraignment, seeking to have his conviction overturned.
However, the appellate court disagrees, citing that while the trial court must ensure a
thorough inquiry, it has discretion in conducting it. The records indicate the appellant
had legal representation, and the charges were explained to him in his native Ilocano
language, addressing his claims of ignorance. The appellant admitted to multiple counts
of rape against private complainant AAA, corroborated by credible evidence from the
prosecution. Even if the trial court's inquiry process was flawed, substantial evidence
justified maintaining the conviction. Consequently, the court affirmed the conviction,
emphasizing that procedural shortcomings do not absolve the appellant of his
culpability, especially under R.A. No. 9346, which prohibits the death penalty.

2. The appellant contends that the Informations against him are inadequate due to the lack
of precise dates for the alleged offenses. However, this argument lacks merit, as the law
does not mandate an exact date for charging a crime; it only requires that the offense
be described as closely as possible to when it occurred. In rape cases, the crucial
element is the commission of the act itself, not its timing. The age of the victim, a young
girl who may struggle to recall specific dates due to trauma, supports this viewpoint. The
appellant also cannot challenge the sufficiency of the charges at this late stage, having
had ample opportunity to raise concerns during the trial. His failure to do so indicates a
waiver of objections. Additionally, the designation of the victim as the appellant's
"youngest sister" adequately conveys their relationship without delving into the precise
degree of consanguinity, differing from cases like Ferolino, where more specificity was
required. Testimony from the victim concerning her age at the time is sufficient
evidence.

3. The private complainant disclosed that she was ten years old during the first rape
incident in 1995 and fifteen during the latest involvement with the appellant, Ceredon,
her brother. This was corroborated by a confrontation witnessed by their mother and
relatives. The defense did not dispute the complainant's age throughout the trial, and
 Ceredon himself acknowledged her age in his guilty plea, aligning with the accusations
against him. The RTC noted that the complainant’s inability to provide specific dates for
the nine incidents did not diminish her credibility, considering her young age and the
traumatic experiences. For the rape charge to be substantiated, only one qualifying
circumstance is necessary, which here is satisfied by both the familial relationship and
the victim's age. Even if age doubts existed, the undeniable familial connection supports
the charges. Following the repeal of the death penalty under R.A. No. 9346, Ceredon’s
sentence was modified to reclusion perpetua without parole. The CA maintained the
civil indemnity but raised moral damages from P50,000 to P75,000, and added
exemplary damages of P25,000.

Findings and Evidence

1. Victim's Testimony:
a. AAA’s account of the multiple rapes detailed the coercive and violent methods
used by Ceredon, including threats and physical force.

2. Credibility of Testimony:
a. The Supreme Court found AAA's testimony credible, corroborated by the nature
of the offenses and the circumstances surrounding each incident.
b. Appeals and Rulings

3. Appeal Grounds:
a. Ceredon appealed based on alleged errors in finding him guilty and in the
imposition of the death penalty.

4. Key Issues Addressed:

a. Improvidence of Guilty Plea: The court ruled that the plea was not improvident
as the trial court followed the procedural requirements.
b. Specificity of Charges: The court determined that exact dates of the offenses
need not be specified in the information.
c. Relationship as a Qualifying Circumstance: The court found that the
relationship (brother-sister) was adequately established without needing to
specify the civil degree of consanguinity.
Sentencing

1. Penalties Imposed:
a. Due to the repeal of the death penalty, the sentence was modified to reclusion
perpetua for each count of rape.

2. Compensation to Victim:
a. Ceredon was ordered to pay AAA civil indemnity of P75,000.00, moral damages
of P75,000.00, and exemplary damages of P25,000.00.

References:

https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/v/digest/people-v-ceredon-y-pagaran?q=G.R.+No.+167179

https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/digest/people-v-ceredon-y-
pagaran?q=gr.+no.+167179+people+of+the+philippines+vs.+Elmer+Ceredon#_
Title:
People of the Philippines vs Capt. Marcial Llanto

Case:
G.R. NO. 146458
Decision Date:

Jan. 20, 2003

A minor, AAA, was repeatedly raped by her uncle, a military officer, who used intimidation.
Despite an intact hymen, the court found the accused guilty, sentencing him to life
imprisonment.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 146458)

Facts:
1. Background and Custodial Relationship
a. In 1995, AAA, a 12-year-old minor at the time of the incident, was entrusted to
the care of the accused Capt. Marcial Llanto and his wife Felicitas Balisi Llanto,
who is the sister of AAA’s father.
b. AAA’s early life involved being cared for by her maternal grandmother due to her
parents’ separation, and later she was placed under the care of her aunt and
uncle.

c. The accused, a captain in the Philippine Air Force, and his family moved through
various air bases (Clark Airbase, Mactan Airbase, and eventually Villamor
Airbase in Pasay City), which contextualizes the domestic setting of the case.

2. Chronology and Circumstances of the Alleged Crime

a. On November 12, 1999, while AAA was at home (with only the accused present,
as his wife was away in Tuguegarao and their sons were elsewhere), the
accused instructed AAA to go to bed.
b. The accused then pulled AAA into his room upstairs, removed her clothing, tied
her hands, and proceeded to molest her physically.

c. He masha her breasts, kissed her private parts, inserted his two fingers into her
vagina, and then conducted penile penetration.
d. Throughout the assault, the accused threatened her with a knife, ensuring she
could not resist due to fear and the loss of physical ability to fight back.
 e. AAA testified that this was not the first incidence of sexual abuse by the accused;
similar acts had occurred since 1996 when she first came under his care.

f. The incident was immediately followed by the accused threatening her to

maintain silence, and later, upon discovery of missing money, a confrontation
ensued which added to the complexity of the domestic relations within his
household.
3. Post-Incident Developments and Evidence
a. The day following the assault, AAA reported her ordeal to her aunt, Dolores
Balisi, who then took her to the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI).
b. AAA executed a sworn statement and underwent a medico-legal examination
conducted by Dr. Annabelle Soliman.

c. The examination revealed that AAA’s hymenal opening was wide, thick, and
elastic—a finding explained to be consistent with the possibility of penetration
without laceration.

d. The testimony of Dr. Soliman and corroborating statements from NBI agent
Rosalina Chiong supported AAA’s account despite an intact hymen.
e. Additional testimonies from various witnesses (including members of the
accused’s family and his son Jessel) provided alternative narratives, including
alibi statements and attempts to explain AAA’s behavior, such as allegations of
recurrent theft.
4. Defense’s Version and Contested Testimony
a. The accused and his family contended that AAA was treated well as part of the
household and that any allegations of rape were either misinterpretations or
fabrications motivated by personal gain (including extortion of his retirement
benefits).

b. The defense questioned the credibility of AAA’s testimony by citing alleged

inconsistencies, her supposed bad character, and the absence of physical
injuries as documented by the examination.

c. Expert witnesses offered by the defense intended to explain the possibility of an

intact hymen despite repeated penetration; however, the trial court did not admit
their testimonies, relying instead on existing jurisprudence and the victim’s own
medical examination.
5. Procedural and Evidentiary Context
a. The trial proceedings underscored the evidentiary issues concerning the
contradictory nature of witness statements regarding domestic behavior (e.g.,
allegations of stealing) and the reliability of AAA as a sole eyewitness.
 b. The information filed for rape contained a defect regarding the precise
qualification of the relationship between the accused and the victim, which later
impacted the imposition of the death penalty.
c. Despite these contentions, the trial court determined that the combination of the
victim’s detailed testimony, the nature of the assault (involving force, violence,
and intimidation), and relevant medical findings sufficiently established the
commission of the crime.
Issues:

1. Sufficiency and Credibility of Evidence

a. Whether the cumulative evidence—including AAA’s testimony, the conduct of the
accused, and the medical report—sufficiently established the elements of rape,
particularly the use of force, violence, and intimidation.
b. Whether the intact nature of the victim’s hymen invalidates her account of
repeated assaults or negates the occurrence of rape.

2. Admissibility of Expert Testimony

a. Whether the trial court erred in excluding the defense’s medico-legal expert
testimonies that could have provided alternative interpretations of the physical
findings.
b. Whether the existing jurisprudence sufficiently addresses the medical intricacies
regarding hymenal elasticity and non-rupture despite penetration.
3. Qualification of the Offense and Penalty
a. Whether the information adequately alleged the required qualifying
circumstances (i.e., the relationship between the accused and the victim) to
warrant the imposition of the death penalty.
b. Whether the defect in the information, specifically regarding the precise nature of
kinship as required by law, necessitated a modification of the sentence from
capital punishment to a lesser penalty (simple rape).

Findings:
Court Findings
● Credibility of Testimony: The trial court found AAA's testimony credible despite the
absence of physical injuries, emphasizing the psychological intimidation present.
● Defense's Argument: The defense argued that the lack of corroborative evidence on
the accused's kinship and the alleged thefts challenged the credibility of AAA.
Doctrine:
Physical resistance need not be proved in rape when intimidation is exercised upon the victim
and the latter submits herself, against her will, to the rapist's advances because of fear for her
life and personal safety. It suffices that the intimidation produces fear in the mind of the victim
that if she did not submit to the bestial demands of the accused, something far worse would
befall her at the time she was being molested. As held by the Court, '(i)f resistance would
nevertheless be futile because of intimidation, then offering none at all does not mean consent
to the assault so as to make the victim's submission to the sexual ad voluntary."

"If the offender is merely a relation not a parent, ascendant, step-parent, or guardian or
common law spouse of the mother of the victim it must be alleged in the Information that he is
a relative by consanguinity or affinity [as the case may be) within the third civil degree."

Important Takeaways
● The absence of physical injuries does not preclude a conviction for rape if intimidation is
established.
● The testimony of the victim, especially in cases involving minors, is given significant
weight in court.

● Defects in charging documents can lead to modifications in sentencing.

Key Legal Provisions

● Article 266-B of the Revised Penal Code: Defines the circumstances under which the
death penalty may be imposed for rape, particularly when the victim is a minor and the
offender is a relative.
● Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure: Mandates that qualifying and aggravating
circumstances be explicitly stated in the information.

References:
https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/summary/people-v-llanto#_

https://www.digest.ph/decisions/people-vs-marcial?tab=digests
Title:
People of the Philippines vs Felix Ortoa

Case:
G.R. NO.174484
Decision Date:

Feb. 23, 2009

Father convicted of raping daughters, sentenced to life without parole; testimonies deemed
credible despite lack of physical evidence.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 174484)

Facts:

● Before the Court on automatic review is the Decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) dated
May 26, 2006 in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01939 which affirmed, with modification, the
decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mandaluyong City, Branch 212, in Criminal
Case Nos. MC01-386-FC-H, MC01-387-FC-H and MC01-388-FC, finding appellant
Felix Ortoa y Obia guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of Rape and one count
of Acts of Lasciviousness and sentencing him to suffer the penalties of Death and
Reclusion Temporal, Medium, respectively.

The facts of the case are as follows:

1. AAA is the eldest while BBB is the second among eight children of common-law spouses
Felix Ortoa (appellant) and CCC.

2. In 1991, when AAA was only three years old, appellant started sexually molesting her each
time her mother was at work. Appellant undressed her and ordered her to lie down on the
wooden bed. He then inserted his finger into her vagina causing her to cry, as she felt pain.
AAA did not narrate any of these incidents to anyone, as she thought that she and the
appellant were just playing games.

3. In 1994, when AAA reached the age of six, appellant started having sexual intercourse with
her. Whenever CCC was at work, he would put AAA's siblings to sleep. Once AAA's
siblings are asleep, the appellant would close the door and windows. He would undress
AAA, insert his penis into her vagina and make push and pull movements. Appellant would
only stop after he ejected a sticky white substance from his organ. AAA cried each time she
 was violated, but she never attempted to report these incidents to anyone, because she did
not know that what her father was doing to her was a crime. Appellant repeatedly had
carnal knowledge of AAA, and it was only when the latter reached the age of 12 that she
realized that she was being sexually abused.

4. In December 1999, AAA experienced profuse bleeding (dinugo) which lasted for several
days. It was during this incident that she confessed to her mother that she was being
sexually abused by an appellant. CCC confronted the appellant, but did not file a complaint
against him.

5. The last time that appellant had sexual intercourse with AAA was on April 3, 2001. After
appellant consummated his carnal desires, he lay beside AAA on their wooden bed. It was
there that CCC saw them. CCC again confronted the appellant. After a brief exchange of
words, the appellant left. AAA again told her mother that she was sexually abused by the
appellant.

6. As to BBB, the appellant started sexually abusing her when she was eight years old.
Everytime she and her father were left inside their house, the latter would close the door,
undress her, partially insert his penis into her vagina and slide it into her labia.

7. Sometime in October 2000, she was summoned by appellant and was told to close the
windows and the door of their house. Thereafter, the appellant told her to lie down on their
wooden bed. At that time, her mother was at work while her older sister, AAA, went to
school. BBB's younger siblings were at home with her and appellant. When BBB was
already lying on the bed, the appellant directed her to remove her underwear. Appellant
then went on top of her, placed his left knee on her right thigh, pulled his short pants and
briefs down to his knees and inserted his erect penis into her vagina. BBB felt pain and
cried quietly. Appellant did push and pull movements. After emitting a sticky white
substance from his penis, the appellant lay down beside BBB and told her not to tell
anybody about what he did, otherwise he would hit her. BBB then stood up and started to
prepare her things, as she was about to go to school.

8. On April 3, 2001, when BBB heard her sister, AAA, tell their mother about her sexual abuse
in the hands of their father, BBB also confessed what their father did to her. CCC
immediately went to the employer of the appellant and sought advice and help from him.
Appellant's employer accompanied her to the Mandaluyong City Police Station. However,
the person they wanted to talk to was not there at that time. Appellant's employer then
advised CCC to go home and instructed her to return the following day.

9. On April 4, 2001, BBB and CCC returned to the office of the appellant's employer. The
latter again accompanied them to the police station where they reported the sexual abuses
committed by appellant against AAA and BBB. Upon instruction of the police, BBB and
 CCC, together with AAA, returned to the station the following morning. AAA and BBB were
subjected to physical examination. Thereafter, they returned to the police station where
their sworn statements were taken. A social worker then took custody of AAA and BBB.

Issues:

1. Rape and Acts of Lasciviousness:

a. The case deals with the criminal prosecution of the accused for multiple counts of
rape and acts of lasciviousness against minors.
b. The primary issue is the determination of the accused's guilt or innocence based
on the evidence presented. Credibility of Witnesses:
c. A significant aspect of the case involves assessing the credibility of the
testimonies given by the victims and other witnesses.
d. The court had to evaluate whether the victims' accounts were believable and
consistent. Sufficiency of Evidence:
e. The court had to determine if the prosecution presented sufficient evidence to
prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
f. The defense presented reasons as to why the accusers may have been biased,
so the court had to evaluate those claims.
2. Proper Application of Penalties:
a. If found guilty, the court had to determine the appropriate penalties to be
imposed on the accused. In essence, the legal issues centered on:
b. The factual determination of whether the crimes were committed.
c. The legal application of criminal law to the established facts.

Findings:
1. Nature of the Case:
a. The case involves charges of rape and acts of lasciviousness.
b. The accused, Felix Ortoa y Obia, was found guilty of these crimes against two young
victims, referred to as AAA and BBB.

Key Findings:
a. The court found that the accused had sexually abused the victims over a period
of time.
b. The court gave weight to the testimonies of the victims.
c. The court rejected the accused's claims that the charges were fabricated due to
grudges held against him.
 d. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) rendered a Decision, finding Felix Ortoa y Obia
GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT for two counts of RAPE and for ACTS
OF LASCIVIOUSNESS.
e. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgement of the lower courts, with
modifications to the sentencing for the Acts of Lasciviousness charge.

Outcome:
a. The accused was convicted.
b. The accused was sentenced to suffer penalties for the crimes of rape and acts of
lasciviousness.
b. Penalties:
a. The Regional Trial Court initially sentenced Felix Ortoa y Obia to death for the
rape charges.
b. The Court of Appeals affirmed the guilty verdict but modified the sentence.
c. The Supreme Court ultimately affirmed Ortoa's guilt but modified the penalty to
reclusion perpetua (life imprisonment) for each rape charge. This change was
due to the Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9346, which prohibits the death penalty.
Legal Context:

a. The case is formally known as G.R. No. 174484 and was heard by the Supreme
Court of the Philippines.
b. The original trial was held in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mandaluyong City,
Branch 212.
c. The Court of Appeals (CA) also reviewed the case before it reached the
Supreme Court.

References:
https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2009/feb2009/gr_174484_2009.html
https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/summary/people-v-ortoa-y-obia-51507
Title:
People of the Philippines vs Abraham Bonagan

Case:
G.R. NO. 177161
Decision Date:

Jun. 30, 2008

A 12-year-old minor was sexually assaulted and raped by Bunagan in 2002 and 2003. Despite
threats, she reported the incidents, leading to his conviction and sentencing to reclusion
perpetua with damages.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 177161)

Facts:
1. Incident in February 2002

a. In the first week of February 2002, at around 7:00 PM, AAA, a 12-year-old minor,
passed by the house of accused-appellant Abraham Bunagan.
b. Bunagan, holding a bolo, approached AAA, held her hands, covered her mouth, and
brought her to the back of his house.
c. Despite AAA's resistance, Bunagan stripped her of her shorts and panty and inserted
his two fingers into her vagina.
d. Bunagan threatened to kill AAA if she reported the incident.
2. Incident in April 2003

a. On April 2, 2003, AAA accompanied her father and his companions to harvest rice in a
field. Afterward, her father and his companions went to gather firewood, leaving AAA
alone.

b. AAA climbed a star apple tree to gather fruits. Upon descending, she encountered
Bunagan, who was armed with a bolo.
c. Bunagan took AAA to a grassy area, laid her down, and threatened her with the bolo.
He undressed her, mounted her, and inserted his penis into her vagina.
d. Bunagan again threatened to kill AAA if she reported the incident.
 3. Reporting and Medical Examination
a. The next day, AAA disclosed the rape to her mother, who reported it to barangay
officials and the police.
b. On April 4, 2003, Dr. Mila F. Lingan-Simangan examined AAA and found healed
lacerations in her hymen, indicating past sexual activity.

4. Accused-Appellant’s Defense
a. Bunagan admitted to having sexual relations with AAA but claimed it was consensual.
He alleged that AAA initiated the encounters and asked for money each time.

5. Trial Court Decision

a. On May 6, 2005, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Bunagan guilty of two counts of
rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. He was also ordered to pay AAA civil
indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages.
6. Court of Appeals Decision
a. On October 27, 2006, the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction for Criminal
Case No. 10079 (rape) but modified the penalty for Criminal Case No. 10078 (sexual
assault) to an indeterminate sentence.

Issues:
1. Whether the Information in Criminal Case No. 10078 was insufficient due to the failure
to state the precise date of the alleged rape.
2. Whether the prosecution proved Bunagan’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt in Criminal
Case No. 10079.

Findings:
Findings of the Lower Courts:

1. Regional Trial Court (RTC)

a. Found Bunagan guilty of both counts of rape.
b. Imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua and awarded damages to the victim.

Damages Awarded:
a. Civil indemnity: PhP 50,000
b. Moral damages: PhP 50,000
 c. Exemplary damages: PhP 25,000
2. Court of Appeals (CA)

a. Affirmed the RTC’s decision regarding Criminal Case No. 10079.

b. Modified the penalty for Criminal Case No. 10078 to an indeterminate sentence.

Key Legal Arguments

1. Insufficiency of Information:
a. Accused-appellant argued that the prosecution failed to specify the exact date of
the commission of the alleged rape.
b. Court Ruling: The precise date is not essential for conviction; proof of the
commission of the crime is sufficient.

2. Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt:

a. Accused claimed that the prosecution did not prove his guilt.
b. Court Ruling: The victim's testimony and the circumstances (use of intimidation)
established guilt.
3. Modifications and Final Ruling

● The Supreme Court affirmed and modified the CA's decision:

a. Criminal Case No. 10079: Affirmed the guilty verdict; maintained the
penalty of reclusion perpetua.
b. Criminal Case No. 10078: Found guilty of rape through sexual assault;
sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 2 years, 4 months, and 1
day to 8 years and 1 day of imprisonment.

Updated Damages:
For Criminal Case No. 10078:

a. Civil indemnity: PhP 30,000

b. Moral damages: PhP 30,000
Key Takeaways

● The case emphasizes that the exact date of the crime is not critical for a conviction of
rape.
 ● Intimidation can substitute for physical force in establishing the crime of rape.
● Victims of sexual assault are entitled to civil indemnity and moral damages without the
necessity of further proof.
● The case illustrates the legal protections afforded to minors and the serious penalties
associated with sexual offenses against them.

References:

https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/v/summary/people-v-bunagan-y-
sonio?q=G.R.+NO.+177161+DATED+JUNE+30%2C+2008
Title:
People of the Philippine vs. Campuhan

Case:
G.R. No. 129433
Decision date:

Mar. 30, 2000

Primo Campuhan was convicted of attempted, not consummated, rape due to insufficient
evidence of penetration, despite allegations of sexual assault on a 4-year-old. Medical findings
and testimony inconsistencies led to a reduced sentence.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 129433)

Facts:
1. Background on Rape Doctrine and Statutory Developments

a. The case builds on the recent jurisprudence regarding the stages of execution of
rape, particularly after the Court in People v. Orita (April 3, 1990) dispensed with
frustrated rape.

b. In Orita, the Court clarified that for rape to be considered consummated, it is not
necessary that full or complete vaginal penetration occur; any penetration—even
slight—into the labia or lips of the female organ is sufficient.
c. The doctrine distinguishes consummated rape from attempted rape by
emphasizing that, without penetration into the labial threshold, the crime can only
be regarded as attempted rape.
2. Facts of the Incident
a. Date and Time of Incident

b. The incident occurred on April 25, 1996, at around 4:00 in the afternoon.
c. People Involved
d. Primo Campuhan y Bello – the accused and a helper employed by Conrado
Plata Jr.
e. Crysthel Pamintuan – the minor victim, 4 years old, whose attire had been
partially removed.
f. Ma. Corazon P. Pamintuan – the victim’s mother, who discovered the alleged act
as she was preparing Milo chocolate drinks for her children.

g. Several relatives and neighbors responded promptly to the incident after

Corazon’s call for help.
h. Discovery of the Incident

i. While on the ground floor of her house, Corazon heard one of her daughters cry
“Ayo’ko, ayo’ko!” and rushed upstairs.
j. Upon reaching the children’s room, she observed Primo Campuhan kneeling
before Crysthel, whose pajamas (described as “jogging pants”) and panty had
been removed.
k. Corazon alleged that she witnessed Primo forcing his penis into Crysthel’s
vagina.
l. Immediate Reaction and Apprehension
m. Shocked, Corazon verbally abused the accused and struck him several times.

n. Primo attempted to escape by pulling up his pants and pushing Corazon away.
o. Corazon’s relatives and neighbors, upon hearing her cries, apprehended Primo
and detained him temporarily until barangay officials were notified.

p. Medical and Physical Evidence

q. A medical examination of the victim, Crysthel, was conducted.

r. The findings reported no extra-genital injuries; specifically, the hymen was intact
and the vaginal orifice remained of normal, small dimensions (approximately 0.5
cm in diameter).
s. Accused’s Version of Events
t. Primo maintained his innocence, alleging that the incident was a
misunderstanding.

u. He contended that Crysthel was playing and had, in effect, invited him to ride on
his back, but an accidental fall led to the subsequent commotion.
v. Primo argued that Corazon’s account was tempted by personal ill will, as she
supposedly held a grudge against him for refusing to perform a family errand.
w. Procedural History
x. Primo Campuhan was initially convicted on May 27, 1997, for statutory rape
under the Revised Penal Code, specifically carrying the extreme penalty of death
due to the victim’s age.
 y. The trial court also imposed moral and exemplary damages against him.
z. The case was elevated to automatic review under Article 335 of the Revised
Penal Code as amended by RA 7659.
3. Evidence and Testimonies Presented at Trial
a. Testimony of Ma. Corazon Pamintuan

b. She recounted witnessing Primo with his short pants down, allegedly in the act of
sexual molestation.
c. Her description included details of his position—kneeling and with one hand
allegedly holding his penis while his other hand manipulated the victim’s legs.
d. Testimony of the Minor Victim
e. Crysthel’s responses were limited: she affirmed contact (“Yes, sir”) when asked if
there was any touching but denied any actual penetration when further
questioned.
f. Her limited articulation, reflective of her tender age, raised evidentiary issues
regarding the precise nature of the alleged contact.
g. Forensic and Medical Evidence
h. The medico-legal report showed no external genital injuries or other signs
indicative of full penetration.
i. The integrity of the hymen and the minimal dimensions of the vaginal orifice were
emphasized.
j. Arguments of the Accused
k. Primo stressed that an instinct for self-preservation would have caused him to
withdraw immediately upon realizing he was being observed, noting that he had
pulled up his pants.
l. He argued that even if physical contact occurred, it did not amount to penetration
into the labial threshold required for a charge of consummated rape.

Issues:

1. Nature of the Rape Committed

a. Whether the act committed by Primo Campuhan amounted to consummated
rape as defined by Philippine jurisprudence, specifically regarding the issue of
partial versus full penetration.
 b. Whether the mere touching of the external parts of the female organ, without
demonstrable penetration into the labia or vagina, sufficed to elevate the crime to
consummated rape.
2. Evidentiary and Credibility Concerns
a. Whether the testimonies of the victim (a 4-year-old child) and her mother were
sufficiently credible to establish beyond reasonable doubt the occurrence of
penetration.
b. Whether the absence of physical, forensic evidence (e.g., intact hymen and lack
of extra-genital injuries) undermined the prosecution’s claim of consummated
rape.
3. Legal Classification and Appropriate Penalty

a. Whether the trial court erred in convicting Primo Campuhan of statutory rape and
sentencing him to death, given that the evidence favored a classification of the
crime as attempted rape.

b. Whether the modifications made on automatic review—specifically reclassifying

the offense and reducing the penalty—were justified by the insufficiency of
evidence for consummated rape.

Findings:

● In the case of People vs. Campuhan (G.R. No. 129433, March 30, 2000), the Supreme
Court ruled that the accused, Primo Campuhan, was guilty of attempted rape, not
consummated rape. The court held that rape is consummated only when there is
penetration of the labia majora, and not merely when the penis strokes the surface of
the female organ. Since there was no evidence of penetration, the court found
Campuhan guilty of attempted rape, a lesser offense. The court's decision highlights the
distinction between attempted and consummated rape under Philippine law.

● The Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled that the crime of rape was not
consummated in this case, as there was no penetration of the victim's female organ.
The accused, Primo Campuhan, was found guilty of attempted rape instead, as he had
commenced the commission of rape but did not perform all the acts necessary to
produce the crime. The court emphasized that for rape to be consummated, there must
be penetration of the labia majora, and not just touching or grazing of the surface of the
female organ.
Evidence and Testimonies
a. Victim's Testimony: The child stated that the accused's penis touched her but did not
penetrate.
b. Mother's Observations: The mother described the scene but her view was questioned
due to the position of the accused.

c. Medical Examination: No physical injuries or evidence of penetration were found.

Court's Analysis
a. Credibility of Testimonies: The court scrutinized the credibility of the mother's
narrative and the child's testimony.
b. Burden of Proof: The prosecution failed to establish that penetration occurred; thus,
the act could not be classified as consummated rape.

c. Legal Conclusion: The case was re-evaluated as attempted rape due to the lack of
evidence for consummated rape.
Penalties and Sentencing:

a. Original Sentence: Death for statutory rape.

b. Modified Sentence: Conviction changed to attempted rape, with a sentence of:

● Indeterminate Sentence: Minimum of eight years and four months of prision mayor
medium to a maximum of fourteen years and ten months of reclusion temporal medium.
c. Damages: Original order for damages was nullified due to the modified
conviction.

References:
https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/v/summary/people-v-campuhan?q=G.R.+No.+129433

https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2000/mar2000/gr_129433_2000.html
 Title:
People of the Philippines vs Bernard Aldana

Case:
G.R. NO. 81817
Decision Date:

Jul. 27, 1989

A 13-year-old accused her 18-year-old neighbor of rape; the Supreme Court acquitted him
due to inconsistencies in her testimony, lack of corroborative evidence, and proof of a
consensual relationship.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 81817)

Facts:
1) Background and Custodial Relationship

a) The case is an appeal from the Regional Trial Court of Bacoor, Cavite, Branch
XIX in Criminal Case No. B-85-49.
b) Bernard Aldana, the accused-appellant, was convicted for the crime of rape and
sentenced to suffer reclusion perpetua, along with an order to indemnify
Stephanie B. Hutchison in the amount of P30,000 and to pay court costs.
c) The complaint was filed by Mrs. Ofelia Barrioquinto-Hutchison, the mother of the
alleged victim, on August 29, 1984, leading to an information dated December
29, 1984.
2) Prosecution’s Narrative of the Incident

a) Incident Timing and Location

b) According to the information, the alleged rape occurred on or about August 18,
1984, in the Municipality of Bacoor, Cavite.
c) The events unfolded in the victim’s bedroom, located on the second floor of her
house. Alleged Criminal Act
d) The accused allegedly used force, violence, and intimidation by covering
Stephanie’s mouth with his right hand, pointing a knife at her, and overpowering
her despite her resistance.
e) The accused is said to have entered the room by removing three glass jalousie
slats from an ungrilled window, proceeded to have unlawful carnal knowledge of
Stephanie, and then exited via the same window.
f) Victim’s Immediate Reactions and Reporting
 g) Stephanie, a 13 1⁄2-year-old high school student, was reportedly awoken and, in
her confusion, did not immediately inform anyone of the incident.
h) She eventually reported the assault on August 26, 1984, once her mother
returned from work, and subsequently submitted to a medical examination by Dr.
Alberto M. Reyes from the National Bureau of Investigation.
i) Medical Evidence
j) Dr. Reyes’ report noted the presence of genital findings consistent with sexual
intercourse but no extragenital injuries.

3) Defense’s Version and Alternative Theories

a) Relationship History
b) The defense presented evidence that Bernard Aldana and Stephanie were
neighbors and had developed a romantic relationship since 1982.
c) They claim that the relationship was consensual, with Stephanie having accepted
Aldana’s courtship beginning early in 1984.
d) Chronology of Consensual Encounters
e) It is testified that on August 11, 13, and 15, 1984, the two had consensual sexual
encounters in Stephanie’s room.
f) Stephanie allegedly invited Aldana into her room on these occasions by removing
three slats from the window, indicating prior planning and mutual consent.
g) Explanation of the August 18-19 Incident
h) On the morning of August 18, 1984, when the accused entered the room,
Stephanie reportedly warned him that her maid was present, causing him to
hastily exit.
i) According to the defense, this intrusion was consistent with the established
pattern of a consensual relationship rather than the use of force and intimidation.

4) Evidence and Witness Testimonies

a. Testimony of the Alleged Victim

b. Stephanie’s account detailed specific physical actions by the accused during the
assault, including covering her mouth, using a knife, and forcibly restraining her,
but this account contained notable inconsistencies.
c. Her narrative included descriptions of her struggling physically, yet she admitted
that certain expected reactions (such as using her left arm or shouting) were
absent or inconsistent.
d. Defense Witnesses and Documentary Evidence
e. Testimonies from Mrs. Erlinda Aldana (the accused’s mother) and Mrs. Josefina
Guadarama, a family friend, indicated that the alleged rape complaint may have
been influenced by personal animosity.
 f. Mr. Manuel Gorobat testified that he observed Stephanie and Aldana together at
the accused’s terrace in the early hours, suggesting a pre-existing, consensual
relationship.
g. Numerous documents, including photographs, love letters, and handwritten notes
exchanged between Stephanie and Bernard were introduced, indicating intimate
relations and communication.
h. Expert Handwriting Analysis
i. Expert witness Jovito R. Gutierrez conducted a comparative handwriting
examination on various documents (letters and notes) submitted by the defense.
j. His findings revealed significant similarities between the questioned notes and
standard handwritings known to be those of Stephanie, thereby supporting the
defense’s contention regarding a consensual relationship.

5) Judicial Proceedings and Appellate Issues

a) The trial court rendered a judgment on November 2, 1987, finding Bernard

Aldana guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
b) On appeal, the accused raised errors concerning:
c) The trial court’s failure to give proper credence to the evidence supporting his
innocence, particularly witness testimonies and documentary evidence.
d) The heavy reliance on the victim’s testimony, which was inconsistent and
uncorroborated, casting doubt on the prosecution’s case.

Issues:

1) Evidentiary and Credibility Challenges

a) Whether the trial court erred in not giving sufficient weight to the defense’s
evidence, including witness testimonies and documentary proofs of a consensual
relationship.
b) Whether the inconsistencies and peculiarities in the victim’s account should have
been given less credence in establishing the use of force and intimidation.

2) Standard of Proof in Rape Cases

a) Whether the prosecution met the burden of proving the accused’s guilt beyond
reasonable doubt, especially given the atypical behavior of the alleged victim
both during and after the incident.

3) Impact of Corroborative and Expert Evidence

a) Whether the handwriting analysis and the introduction of love letters and
photographs effectively undermine the prosecution’s narrative of a forcible rape.
 b) How the appellate court should weigh the circumstantial evidence suggesting a
relationship of mutual consent against the claims of use of force.

Findings:

Comparative examination and analysis of the questions and the standard

writings reveal significant similarities in handwriting movement, stroke structure and other
individual handwriting characteristics.

Summary:
This case involves an appeal by Bernard Aldana (defendant-appellant) against his
conviction for rape by the Regional Trial Court of Bacoor, Cavite. The alleged victim was
Stephanie B. Hutchison, a 13-year-old student. The prosecution claimed Aldana forcibly
raped Hutchison in her bedroom on August 19, 1984. Aldana claimed they were in a
consensual relationship and had engaged in sexual intercourse multiple times. The Supreme
Court acquitted Aldana, finding that his guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt due
to inconsistencies in Hutchison's testimony and evidence supporting Aldana's claim of a
relationship.

References:
https://jur.ph/jurisprudence/summary/people-v-llanto#_

https://www.digest.ph/decisions/people-vs-marcial?tab=digests
 REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8353
AN ACT EXPANDING THE DEFINITION OF THE CRIME OF RAPE,

RECLASSIFYING THE SAME AS A CRIME AGAINST PERSONS, AMENDING FOR

THE PURPOSE ACT NO. 3815, AS AMENDED, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
REVISED PENAL CODE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in

Congress assembled:

Section 1. Short Title. - This Act shall be known as "The Anti-Rape Law of 1997."

Sec. 2. Rape as a Crime Against Persons. - The crime of rape shall hereafter be
classified as a Crime Against Persons under Title Eight of Act No. 3815, as amended,
otherwise known as the Revised Penal Code. Accordingly, there shall be incorporated

into Title Eight of the same Code a new chapter to be known as Chapter Three on
Rape, to read as follows:
"Chapter Three

"Rape
Article 266-A. Rape: When and How Committed. - Rape is committed:

1. ) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the
following circumstances:

. Through force, threat, or intimidation;

. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;
. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and

. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though
none of the circumstances mentioned above be present.
 2.) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof,
shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person's mouth or anal
orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.

Article 266-B. Penalty. - Rape under paragraph 1 of the next preceding article shall be
punished by reclusion perpetua.
a. Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more
persons, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
b. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the
penalty shall become reclusion perpetua to death.
c. When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion
thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.
d. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, homicide is committed, the penalty
shall be death.

The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of
the following aggravating/qualifying circumstances:

1. When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent,
ascendant, step-parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third
civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim;
2. When the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities or any law
enforcement or penal institution;
3. When the rape is committed in full view of the spouse, parent, any of the children or
other relatives within the third civil degree of consanguinity;

4. When the victim is a religious engaged in legitimate religious vocation or calling and is
personally known to be such by the offender before or at the time of the commission of
the crime;

5. When the victim is a child below seven (7) years old;

6. When the offender knows that he is afflicted with the Human Immuno-Deficiency Virus
(HIV)/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) or any other sexually
transmissible disease and the virus or disease is transmitted to the victim;
7. When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or paramilitary
units thereof or the Philippine National Police or any law enforcement agency or penal
institution, when the offender took advantage of his position to facilitate the commission
of the crime;
 8. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has suffered permanent
physical mutilation or disability;
9. When the offender knew of the pregnancy of the offended party at the time of the
commission of the crime; and
10. When the offender knew of the mental disability, emotional disorder and/or physical
handicap of the offended party at the time of the commission of the crime.

Rape under paragraph 2 of the next preceding article shall be punished by prision mayor.

a. Whenever the rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more
persons, the penalty shall be prision mayor to reclusion temporal.

b. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the
penalty shall be reclusion temporal.

c. When the rape is attempted and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion
thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion temporal to reclusion perpetua.

d. When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, homicide is committed, the penalty
shall be reclusion perpetua.

e. Reclusion temporal shall be imposed if the rape is committed with any of the ten
aggravating/ qualifying circumstances mentioned in this article.

Article 266-C. Effect of Pardon. - The subsequent valid marriage between the offended party
shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty imposed.

In case it is the legal husband who is the offender, the subsequent forgiveness by the wife as
the offended party shall extinguish the criminal action or the penalty: Provided, That the crime
shall not be extinguished or the penalty shall not be abated if the marriage is void ab initio.

"Article 266-D. Presumptions. - Any physical overt act manifesting resistance against the act
of rape in any degree from the offended party, or where the offended party is so situated as to
render her/him incapable of giving valid consent, may be accepted as evidence in the
prosecution of the acts punished under Article 266-A."

Sec. 3. Separability Clause. - If any part, Sec., or provision of this Act is declared invalid or
unconstitutional, the other parts thereof not affected thereby shall remain valid.

Sec. 4. Repealing Clause. - Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, and all laws, acts,
presidential decrees, executive orders, administrative orders, rules and regulations
inconsistent with or contrary to the provisions of this Act are deemed amended, modified or
repealed accordingly.

Sec. 5. Effectivity. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after completion of its
publication in two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Approved,

(SGD.) JOSE DE VENECIA, JR.

Speaker of the House of Representatives

(SGD.) ERNESTO M. MACEDA

President of the Senate

This Act, which is a consolidation of Senate Bill No. 950 and House Bill No. 6265, was finally
passed by the Senate and the House of Representatives on June 5, 1997 and September 3,
1997, respectively.

(SGD.) ROBERTO P. NAZARENO

Secretary General House of Representative

Approved: September 30, 1997

(SGD.) FIDEL V. RAMOS

President of the Philippines

References:
https://pcw.gov.ph/assets/files/2019/05/RA_8353Anti-Rape-Law.pdf