Title
CICL XXXvs. People
Case
G.R. No. 246146
Decision Date
Mar 18, 2021
A 15-year-old minor, CICL XXX, was convicted of Lascivious Conduct under RA 7610 for forcibly kissing and touching a minor victim, despite his alibi defense. The Supreme Court affirmed guilt, modified the crime classification, and remanded for appropriate disposition.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 246146)

Key Dates

• Incident: August 30, 2012.
• RTC Decision: June 2, 2017.
• CA Decision: September 27, 2018.
• CA Resolution: March 4, 2019.
• SC Decision: March 18, 2021.

Applicable Law

• 1987 Constitution (as decision is post-1990).
• Revised Penal Code, Article 336 (Acts of Lasciviousness).
• Republic Act No. 7610, Section 5(b) (Lascivious Conduct on Minors).
• Republic Act No. 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act).
• Indeterminate Sentence Law.
• Jurisprudence on factual review, witness credibility, women’s honor doctrine, alibi and denial defenses.

Factual Antecedents

AAA was inside her school campus when petitioner allegedly grabbed her, threatened her with an icepick, kissed her lips and neck, removed her garments, and groped her breasts against her will. AAA escaped when a teacher passed, later reported the assault to a priest, her aunt, school authorities, the barangay, and finally to the police.

Defense Position

Petitioner denied the allegations, presenting an alibi that he was in MAPEH class from 6:45 PM to 8:00 PM, supported by testimony from his teacher FFF and classmates CCC and DDD. He claimed to have gone home by 8:30 PM.

RTC Ruling

The RTC found petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Acts of Lasciviousness (Article 336 RPC), imposed 20 days of arresto menor, awarded AAA ₱20,000 civil indemnity, ₱30,000 moral damages, and ₱2,000 exemplary damages, and suspended sentence under R.A. 9344 due to petitioner’s minority.

CA Ruling

The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC conviction and damages award, rejecting petitioner’s challenge to witness credibility and his alibi defense.

Issue on Appeal

Whether the CA erred in upholding petitioner’s conviction for Acts of Lasciviousness despite alleged inconsistencies in AAA’s testimony and uncontroverted alibi evidence.

Standard of Review

Factual findings, especially on credibility, carry great weight when made by the trial court and affirmed by the CA. The Supreme Court will not disturb such findings absent misapprehension of material facts.

Credibility of Complainant

The Court upheld the clear, positive, and consistent testimony of AAA as intrinsically believable. Minor discrepancies regarding the school’s population and timeline were deemed immaterial to the core narrative.

Women’s Honor Doctrine

The Supreme Court confirmed that the tempered women’s honor doctrine permits conviction on the victim’s credible testimony alone, particularly for young and vulnerable complainants, without reverting to outdated cultural stereotypes.

Defense of Denial and Alibi

Denial is weak unless supported by strong evidence; alibi must prove physical impossibility. Petitioner failed to demonstrate such impossibility given spatial and temporal proximity. Lower courts properly rejected his defense.

Modification of Crime Designation

The Supreme Court reclassified the offense as Lascivious Conduct under Section 5(b) of R.A. 7610, given that the victim was under 18 years old, aligning with current jurisprudence on sexual offenses against minors.

Modification of Penalty

Recognizing petitioner’s minority as a mitigating circumstance, the penalty was adjusted to prision correccional medium (2 years, 4 months, 1 day

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.