Case Digest (G.R. No. 204061)
Facts:
In the case of Edmisael C. Lutap v. People of the Philippines, petitioner Edmisael C. Lutap (“Egay”) was charged before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Quezon City, Branch 94, with rape by sexual assault under Article 266-A(2) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. 8353 (the “Anti-Rape Law of 1997”). The information alleged that on April 27, 2004, in Quezon City, Lutap forcibly inserted his finger into the genital organ of AAA, a six-year-old girl, against her will. At trial, the prosecution presented AAA, her brother BBB, her mother DDD, and a police officer, all of whom testified that Lutap touched AAA’s vagina with his middle finger. BBB graphically mimicked the act, and AAA confirmed that Lutap touched her vagina while she wore shorts and underwear. The RTC found Lutap guilty beyond reasonable doubt of rape by sexual assault and sentenced him to six years and one day to twelve years and one day of imprisonment, plus civil indemnity, moral and exemplary damages. On appCase Digest (G.R. No. 204061)
Facts:
- Procedural Background
- Petitioner Edmisael C. Lutap was charged by Information (April 2004 incident) with rape by sexual assault for allegedly inserting his finger into the genital organ of AAA, a six-year-old minor, by force, threats and intimidation.
- RTC, Quezon City Branch 94, convicted Petitioner of rape by sexual assault (August 23, 2010) and sentenced him to 6 years and 1 day to 12 years and 1 day of reclusion temporal, plus damages.
- Court of Appeals modified the conviction to attempted rape (July 10, 2012) with a lighter penalty (6 months arresto mayor to 4 years 2 months prision correccional) and adjusted damages; motion for reconsideration denied (October 2, 2012).
- Petitioner filed a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 before the Supreme Court.
- Incident Details
- Victim AAA (born September 11, 1997) was at home watching television with siblings BBB and CCC and Petitioner (“Tito Egay”), a family friend, on April 27, 2004 at around 6:30 PM. Mother DDD was cooking nearby.
- AAA was in shorts and panties sitting on the floor; Petitioner on the sofa one foot away. BBB witnessed Petitioner repeatedly touching AAA’s vagina with his middle finger. AAA swayed off his hand.
- BBB reported to DDD, who questioned AAA. AAA first said she swayed his hand, then recounted past incidents at Petitioner’s house where he allegedly removed her panties, opened her legs and licked her vagina.
- DDD confronted Petitioner, who apologized and blamed wet panties. AAA underwent medical examination on April 30, 2004.
- Trial Proceedings
- Prosecution witnesses: AAA, BBB, DDD, and P/Supt. Ruby Grace Sabino-Diangson. Defense witnesses: Petitioner and Melba Garcia (Purok Leader).
- Petitioner denied all accusations, claiming he was merely separating quarreling children. He suggested AAA be examined.
- RTC credited AAA’s and BBB’s testimonies as candid and graphic, finding beyond reasonable doubt that Petitioner inserted his finger into AAA’s vagina.
- CA re-examined the testimonies and concluded there was only slight touching without penetration; therefore, Petitioner was guilty only of attempted rape.
Issues:
- Whether the Court of Appeals erred in convicting Petitioner of attempted rape despite absence of proof of any penetration or intent to penetrate AAA’s sexual organ.
- Whether the evidence on record constitutes clear, convincing and positive proof that Petitioner touched AAA’s vagina with intent to forcefully insert his finger.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)