People v. Orita

At about 1:30 a.m. on March 20, 1983, the complainant, a 19-year-old college freshman in Borongan, Eastern Samar, came home to her boarding house. Ceilito Orita, a Philippine Constabulary soldier who often visited another boarder, seized her at the door and put a knife to her neck. He dragged her upstairs to her room, pushed her against the wall and made her undress. Still holding the knife, he tried twice, in two positions, to have intercourse with her. Only a portion of his penis entered because she kept moving. When he had both hands flat on the floor, she escaped. She fled through several rooms, jumped out of a window and ran naked to the municipal building, where police found her crying on the stairs. The medical certificate noted a hematoma on her neck, abrasions, and erythematous, tender areas around the vaginal orifice. Her hymen was intact and the examining finger could barely enter. The RTC found no conclusive evidence of penetration. It convicted Orita of frustrated rape, with the aggravating circumstances of dwelling and nighttime, and imposed 10 years and 1 day to 12 years of prision mayor. The Court of Appeals modified this to rape with reclusion perpetua. It then set aside its own decision and forwarded the case to the Supreme Court.

1. 1Whether inconsistencies in the testimony of the complainant and the police officer destroyed their credibility.
2. 2Whether the crime of frustrated rape exists, and whether the conviction for frustrated rape was proper.

Guilty of consummated rape (Medialdea, J.). The alleged inconsistencies were trivial and, if anything, showed that the witnesses had not been rehearsed. The complainant's account was straightforward and corroborated by the police officer and the physical findings. Both the accused and the Solicitor General argued that there is no frustrated rape, and the Court agreed. Under Article 6 and U.S. v. Eduave, a felony is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution but the felony is not produced by causes independent of his will. In rape, the offender attains his purpose from the moment of carnal knowledge, and all the elements of the offense are then accomplished. Nothing more is left to be done, so the felony is consummated. Perfect penetration is not essential. Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ suffices, and entry of the labia without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina warrants conviction. Without penetration, rape is only attempted. Given the nature, elements and manner of execution of rape, it is hardly conceivable how the frustrated stage could ever be committed. People v. Eriña (1927) was a stray decision never reiterated. The mention of frustrated rape in Article 335, as amended by R.A. 2632 and R.A. 4111, is a dead provision. There was no real variance between the testimony and the medical certificate. The vulva was reddened and tender, the physician did not rule out penetration, and the complainant testified that there was partial penetration. A credible victim's testimony alone can support a conviction. Rape with a deadly weapon, attended by dwelling and nighttime, called for death. Because the 1987 Constitution bars its imposition, the Court imposed reclusion perpetua and P30,000 indemnity.