Title
Cruz y Bartolome vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 166441
Decision Date
Oct 8, 2014
Petitioner charged with attempted rape and lascivious acts against two victims. Supreme Court ruled acts as lasciviousness, not rape, modifying penalty to three months minimum, two years maximum, plus damages.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 95070)

Prosecution’s Version of Facts

Petitioner and his wife employed AAA and BBB to sell wares in Bangar. They slept in adjacent tents. Around 2 a.m., AAA awoke to petitioner on top of her, removing her garments and touching her breasts and genitalia while threatening to kill her if she screamed. Unable to accomplish penetration due to AAA’s resistance, petitioner later touched BBB similarly. AAA and BBB reported the incidents to local authorities and executed sworn statements on January 10, 1994.

Defense’s Version of Events

Petitioner denied all allegations, maintaining the tents were in a public, crowded area and that any scream would have drawn attention. He asserted that the complainants colluded to extort money.

RTC Judgment

On April 6, 2000, the trial court found petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of both attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness. He was sentenced under Article 335 (attempted rape) to an indeterminate penalty of 4 years, 2 months prision correccional (minimum) to 10 years prision mayor (maximum), plus accessory penalties and P20,000 moral damages to AAA; and, under Article 336 (acts of lasciviousness), to 4 months arresto mayor (minimum) to 4 years, 2 months prision correccional (maximum), plus accessory penalties and P10,000 moral damages to BBB.

Court of Appeals Decision

On July 26, 2004, the Court of Appeals affirmed the attempted rape conviction and moral damages awarded to AAA. It acquitted petitioner of acts of lasciviousness concerning BBB due to BBB’s non-presentation and lack of evidence that the touching occurred against her will.

Issues on Appeal to the Supreme Court

Petitioner contended that (1) the trial courts erred in crediting the “incredible” testimony of AAA, and (2) the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Scope of Supreme Court Review

Under Rule 45, only questions of law are subject to review. Factual findings, witness credibility assessments, and the CA’s affirmation of the RTC’s factual conclusions are binding.

Legal Definition of Attempted Rape

– Article 6, RPC: An attempt requires commencement of a felony by overt acts without completing all execution acts, due to external interruption.
– People v. Lamahang: Overt acts must directly lead toward the felony, showing intent to commit that specific offense.

Law on Rape under Article 335, RPC

Rape is carnal knowledge of a woman by force or intimidation, when she is unconscious, or under 12 years old. Carnal knowledge is established by any penetration of the labia majora or labia minora by the penis.

Distinction between Frustrated and Attempted Rape

– Frustrated rape is legally impossible, as completion occurs upon slightest penetration.
– Attempted rape occurs when overt acts toward penetration are performed but do not consummate the act.

Intent Requirement in Attempted Rape

Intent to lie with the female must be inferred from overt acts directly connected to penetration; mere preparatory or equivocal acts do not suffice to establish that intent.

Application to Petitioner’s Conduct

Petitioner climbed atop the naked victim, touched her genitalia and breasts, but no evidence showed his erect penis poised for penetration. These acts, though lewd, were insufficient to infer intent to consummate rape.

Definition and Elements of Acts of Lasciviousness

Under Art







...continue reading

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