Title
Allan De Vera y Ante vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 246231
Decision Date
Oct 9, 2023
Petitioner acquitted of child abuse charges as prosecution failed to prove intent to degrade minor; inconsistencies in testimony and insufficient evidence of trauma led to reasonable doubt.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 246231)

Facts:

  • Antecedents
    • Information filed in RTC Q-12-177236 (Branch 94, Quezon City) charged Allan de Vera y Ante (petitioner) with violation of Section 5(6) of RA 7610 (lascivious conduct with minor AAA, 16 years old); petitioner pleaded not guilty.
    • RTC convicted (Aug 2, 2016): found masturbation in victim’s presence as lascivious conduct under Sec. 5(6) RA 7610; sentenced to prision mayor (8 years + 1 day to 17 years 4 months + 1 day), ordered civil indemnity (₱20,000), moral (₱30,000) and exemplary damages (₱2,000).
    • CA (CA-G.R. CR No. 39723) modified conviction to Section 10(a) RA 7610 (other acts of child abuse), imposed indeterminate sentence (4 years 9 months + 11 days to 6 years 8 months + 1 day), damages reduced to ₱10,000 civil indemnity, ₱20,000 moral damages, 6% interest.
    • SC (Jan 20, 2021) affirmed CA: held masturbation before minor is psychological abuse; denied petitioner’s certiorari petition.
  • Prosecution Version
    • AAA went to Filipino Department mini-library at XXX University on July 7, 2012 for diagnostic exam, proctored by petitioner.
    • While seated, she heard tapping like “skin slapping skin,” looked left, saw petitioner holding a binder in left hand and masturbating his penis with right hand.
    • AAA reported incident to campus security; mother BBB assisted in police interview and translation; AAA underwent psychiatric consults and was diagnosed with anxiety, then PTSD.
  • Defense Version
    • Petitioner denied lewd intent—claimed broken zipper concealed by pulling shirt; was arranging books in mini-library.
    • Door remained open; area was well-lit and frequented by others; no one corroborated masturbation; security found no stains on clothing; internal disciplinary committee cleared him.
  • Motion for Reconsideration
    • Petitioner alleged material inconsistencies in AAA’s testimony; reliance on “mere say-so”; absence of child participation or lewd design; insufficient proof of trauma; lack of intent to demean; undue damages; mitigating circumstances.
    • OSG opposed: inconsistencies trivial; broken zipper irrelevant; masturbation need not involve contact; evidence of PTSD and specific intent proven; voluntary surrender not shown; damages proper.
  • SC Reconsideration Ruling
    • Granted Motion for Reconsideration and Supplement.
    • Reversed SC Decision (Jan 20, 2021) and CA Decision; acquitted petitioner for failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Issues:

  • Did the prosecution prove beyond reasonable doubt that petitioner masturbated in AAA’s presence?
  • Did petitioner’s act cause serious or severe psychological harm to AAA?
  • Did petitioner act with specific intent to debase, degrade, or demean AAA’s intrinsic worth and dignity?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.