Case Digest (G.R. No. 88724)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Ceilito Orita alias "Lito," G.R. No. 88724, April 03, 1990, Supreme Court First Division, Medialdea, J., writing for the Court. The respondent-appellant was prosecuted by the People in Criminal Case No. 83-031-B before the Regional Trial Court, Branch II, Borongan, Eastern Samar, for rape under an information alleging that on March 20, 1983 he, by threats with a Batangas knife and with lewd designs, had sexual intercourse with Cristina S. Abayan against her will. The accused pleaded not guilty.At trial the prosecution presented the victim and other witnesses, and offered a medical certificate (Exhibit A). After the prosecution rested, the defense did not present witnesses but filed a motion to dismiss. On August 5, 1985, the trial court found the accused guilty of frustrated rape (Art. 335, RPC) and imposed indeterminate prision mayor (10 years and 1 day to 12 years) and P4,000 indemnity, the court stating there was no conclusive proof of penetration.
The accused appealed to the Court of Appeals. On December 29, 1988 the Court of Appeals modified the RTC judgment, found the appellant guilty of rape, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, and ordered indemnity of P30,000. On January 11, 1989 the Court of Appeals issued a resolution setting aside its December 29, 1988 decision and forwarded the case to the Supreme Court pursuant to Section 9, paragraph 3 of Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 in conjunction with Section 17, paragraph 3, subparagraph 1 of the Judiciary Act of 1948.
The record shows the victim (a 19‑year‑old student) testified she was accosted at knifepoint in her boarding house, dragged upstairs, stripped, and forced to insert the accused’s penis into her vagina though only a portion entered; she escaped naked and sought help. Police corroborated portions of her flight; medical findings reported an intact hymen, erythematous and tender vulva, abrasions and hematoma consistent with struggle, and difficulty admitting a examin...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Do the alleged inconsistencies in the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies create reasonable doubt as to the accused’s guilt?
- Was the trial court correct in convicting the accused of frustrated rape rather than cons...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)