Title
Villanueva y Irodistan vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 228980
Decision Date
Jan 22, 2024
Marvin Villanueva was found guilty of lascivious conduct against a minor, touching her buttocks in public. The CA upheld the RTC's ruling, modifying the sentence to 14 years and 8 months of imprisonment and fines.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 228980)

Applicable Law

This case primarily hinges on Republic Act No. 7610 (RA 7610), specifically Article III, Section 5(b), which penalizes lascivious conduct towards minors. The law aims to provide stronger deterrence against child abuse, exploitation, and discrimination.

Facts of the Case

The factual background reveals that on November 25, 2010, while AAA and her friends were using a non-working escalator, Villanueva allegedly lifted AAA's skirt and touched her buttocks. This act was witnessed by AAA's friend, BBB, who yelled for help, leading to Villanueva's apprehension by traffic enforcer Tolentino and later by police officers. Villanueva denied the allegations, claiming he was merely trying to pass by AAA in a crowded area while holding his cellphones.

RTC Ruling

In its decision dated August 28, 2013, the RTC found Villanueva guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to an indeterminate prison term ranging from eight years and one day to 17 years, four months, and one day, along with the payment of moral and exemplary damages to AAA. The RTC emphasized the credibility of AAA's testimony, which was corroborated by eyewitness accounts, solidifying the case against Villanueva.

CA Ruling

The CA upheld the RTC's verdict in its decision on October 28, 2016, modifying the penalty to a range of 14 years and eight months to 20 years of reclusion temporal, and increasing the damages awarded to AAA. It reaffirmed that all elements of sexual abuse under RA 7610 were satisfied based on the nature of Villanueva's actions and AAA’s age at the time of the incident.

Issue for Resolution

The central issue before the Supreme Court was whether the CA rightly affirmed Villanueva's conviction for violating Article III, Section 5(b) of RA 7610. Villanueva contended that there was insufficient evidence of lewd design and that his actions could not be construed as lascivious conduct given the circumstances he described.

Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court found no merit in Villanueva's arguments, affirming the findings of the lower courts. The Court determined that the prosecution successfully proved each element of lascivious conduct, noting that AAA's minority was established and her credible testimony clearly described Villanueva's actions. The Court ruled that Villanueva's defense of denial was inadequate against the strong evidence provided by the prosecution.

Modification of Ruling

The Court clarified that while Villanueva was described as guilty of violating Section 5(b) of RA

...continue reading

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