Title
Supreme Court
People vs. XXX62846
Case
G.R. No. 262846
Decision Date
Feb 18, 2025
A father was convicted of rape and unjust vexation against his daughter, with the decision affirming the penalties imposed and modifying the charge of attempted rape to a conviction for the same.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 262846)

Petitioner and Respondent

• Petitioner: XXX262846, appellant challenging convictions
• Respondent: People of the Philippines, appellee

Key Dates

• Alleged incidents: January 2013
• RTC Joint Decision: June 26, 2018
• CA Decision: January 26, 2021
• Supreme Court Decision: February 18, 2025

Applicable Law

• 1987 Philippine Constitution
• Revised Penal Code, Articles 266-A(1), 266-B (rape), Article 287(2) (unjust vexation), Articles 6 and 51 (attempted rape)
• Republic Act No. 8353 (Anti-Rape Law of 1997)
• Indeterminate Sentence Law

Facts

AAA262846, a 16-year-old first-year college student, lived with her father, XXX262846, in Misamis Oriental. In early January 2013, while AAA262846 slept, XXX262846 forcibly kicked her, pulled her hair, covered her mouth, removed her garments, and proceeded to rape her. He threatened to kill her and other family members if she cried out. A second attempt occurred later that month but was thwarted when AAA262846’s bent knee struck her father’s stomach, causing him to desist. AAA262846 eventually reported the incidents in February 2013. Medical examination revealed healed hymenal lacerations indicative of penetration. XXX262846 denied the allegations, asserting alibi and motive of false accusation. Two defense witnesses offered contradictory alibi testimonies.

Procedural History

• RTC (Branch 26, Medina, Misamis Oriental) June 26, 2018 – Convicted XXX262846 of rape (reclusion perpetua; PHP 100,000 each civil indemnity, moral and exemplary damages) and of unjust vexation (30 days arresto menor; PHP 10,000 civil indemnity).
• CA (En Banc) January 26, 2021 – Affirmed RTC decision.
• XXX262846 appealed to the Supreme Court.

Issue

Whether the CA erred in affirming convictions for rape under Article 266-A(1) and for unjust vexation instead of attempted rape.

Supreme Court Ruling

Appeal denied in part and granted in part.

  1. Rape conviction under Article 266-A(1) – AFFIRMED.
  2. Unjust vexation conviction – MODIFIED to attempted rape under Article 266-A(1).

Analysis – Rape Conviction

• Elements proven: (a) carnal knowledge of a woman by force and intimidation; (b) moral ascendancy of father over daughter.
• Credibility of AAA262846’s uncontradicted testimony supported by medical findings.
• Aggravating circumstance of filial relationship properly considered; qualifying circumstance of minority not alleged in the Information and thus treated as aggravating only.
• Sentence of reclusion perpetua and awards of PHP 100,000 each for civil indemnity, moral and exemplary damages upheld.

Analysis – Attempted Rape Conviction

• Courts below misapplied spontaneous desistance doctrine. Overt act requirement satisfied by the removal of victim’s garments and father’s attempt to mount her.
• Attempted rape defined as commencement of penetration acts frustrated by causes other than spontaneous desistance.
• By appealing, appellant waived double jeopardy protection, permitting review and reclassification.
• Penalty for attempted rape: indeterminate term of six year

    ...continue reading

    Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
    Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.