G.R. No. 13866. December 20, 1918
THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. MARTIN HUERTAS, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
TORRES, J.:
the Court of First Instance of Batangas, on March 19, 1917, whereby Martin
Huertas was charged with the crime of rape, and, on November 27 of the same
year, the defendant was sentenced to twelve years and one day of reclusion
temporal, with an allowance of one-half of the time of imprisonment
suffered during the pendency of the case, to the accessory penalties, to pay an
indemnity in the form of dowry of P300 to the offended party, Rustica Hernandez,
to recognize the offspring, should there be any, and in such a case to furnish
P6 a month for the support of the child until it becomes of age, and to pay the
costs. From this judgment the defendant appealed.
The following facts were duly proven at the trial: On the afternoon of August
13, 1916, while Rustica Hernandez, a girl of 17 years of age, was washing
clothes in the Mahabangdahilic River, of the municipality of Lemery, as she was
ordered so to do by her grandmother Ana Macatangay, the defendant went to her
and, having learned that the girl was alone washing on the river bank,
immediately said to her that he would satisfy his desires although she should
resist. On hearing this statement the girl became very frightened and tried to
escape by running up the river bank, but the defendant pursued her and
threatened her with a penknife which he drew from his pocket. He soon succeeded
in catching her and then carried her in his arms to a secluded place a short
distance away where, in spite of her resistance and sobs, he stretched her out
on the ground. During the struggle that ensued he succeeded in pinning one of
the girl’s arms under her body and, in order to overcome her strong resistance,
raised up her right leg and placed it on one of his shoulders. In this
situation, despite the girl’s violent position, by which means she was subdued,
he was able to consummate, and did consummate, the rape which he had intended to
commit. Just at that moment the girl’s grandmother Ana Macatangay went to the
place, in search of her granddaughter, and on hearing the latter’s sobs,
approached the spot where Rustica Hernandez was, when she saw the defendant
still mounted on top of her granddaughter, holding sexual intercourse with her
in spite of the girl’s resistance. As soon as the defendant heard the
grandmother Macatangay’s voice, he got up and ran away, pursued by the latter,
while the girl returned home at once and immediately thereafter, accompanied by
her relative Felisa. presented herself before the lieutenant of the barrio to
complain of the crime committed against her; but as this officer stated to the
offended party that the matter did not come within his jurisdiction, and as it
was already night time, she, her companion Felisa and her grandmother
Macatangay, which latter joined the two former on their departure from the
barrio lieutenant’s house, all returned to their respective homes, and, on the
following day, went to the. town to file complaint before the justice of the
peace, in consequence whereof the latter ordered the girl to be examined by the
physician, the president of the board of health of Lemery, who certified
(record, p. 53) that the offended girl had bruises on the back of her left hand
and on her upper lip; that her virginal membrane had been recently perforated
apparently by the insertion of the virile member, which tearing of said membrane
was still fresh, although it was not bleeding; and that blood stains were found
on the skirt which the girl was wearing at the time she was examined. The
physician who made the examination ratified the contents of the certificate
above referred to, and stated besides that the bruises noted on the girl’s lip
and left hand must have been produced as results of the struggle had between her
and her ravisher, and of the blows with the fist and the slaps she apparently
received.
The testimony of the offended girl, of her grandmother Ana Macatangay and of
her mother, Petronila Mendoza, corroborate the facts above related. The girl’s
grandmother testified that when she was at a distance of about ten brazas from
her granddaughter and before she saw the latter under the defendant, she heard
Rustica Hernandez sob and, on approaching the spot where the girl was, noticed
that the latter was making movements of resistance to the unchaste act which the
defendant was performing. The mother of the offended girl testified that when
she, witness, learned of the occurrence she went to Ana Macatangay’s house where
she found her daughter crying, with her hair disheveled and her skirt soiled
with earth and weeds of the field and spotted with blood.
The barrio lieutenant, Filomeno Zagala, corroborated the testimony previously
given to the effect that on the afternoon of the day of the crime the offended
girl and the woman Felisa presented themselves before him and reported to him
what had occurred. He further testified that he noticed that the girl’s hair was
disheveled and soiled with earth, as was also her face and skirt, and that,
after he had taken cognizance of the facts, he advised them to complain to the
authorities of the pueblo.
The defendant, Martin Huertas, in his dissipation pleaded not guilty and in
an affidavit stated that for about two years past he had been maintaining
amorous relations with the aggrieved party, who had reciprocated his attentions;
that on the date of the occurrence he, his sister Andrea and the girl Rustica
Hernandez were in a house where a novenary was being held, and on returning he
requested of the latter, his sweetheart, proof of their amorous relations; that
the girl then told him that on the afternoon of that same day she would go to
wash clothes in said river where he would find her; that when, a short while
afterwards,, he went to the river bank indicated, he did in fact find her there
engaged in the occupation mentioned; that upon his making a certain request to
her, she replied that she placed herself at his disposal; that therefore they
walked to another place quite a little distance away and secluded, and there had
sexual intercourse; that the girl willingly consented to the defendant’s lying
with her, and that while he was so doing Ana Macatangay, the girl’s grandmother,
appeared on the spot and caught them in .the performance of the act of
copulation; and that, on seeing the woman approach them, he ran away.
Maxima Vergara, one of the witnesses for the defense. testified that in a
wood where she had tied a bull of hers she saw the defendant and the girl
Rustica Hernandez sitting together and embracing each other, for which reason
witness immediately left the place. Lucio Cabral, another witness for the
defense, testified that on the afternoon of the occurrence he met the girl
Rustica and Ana Macatangay as they were walking along the road, and that the
latter was maltreating the former and urging her to complain of the crime, but
that the girl refused to do so.
The foregoing facts certainly constitute the crime of rape, inasmuch as the
defendant, by force and intimidation against the girl Rustica Hernandez’ will
and in spite of the tenacious resistance she opposed to the act of holding her
fast and subdued, succeeded in lying with her, and succeeded in consummating the
crime as the offended girl herself testified and as appears from the certificate
of the physician who examined her and found in her genital organ sign of the
copulative act having been performed with force and violence. Moreover, these
facts are corroborated by the testimony of the witnesses who, a few moments
after the occurrence, found the girl with her hair disheveled and her face and
clothes soiled with earth, on account of the defendant having lain with her on
the bare ground of the river bank, in which condition she was also seen by the
barrio lieutenant before whom she presented herself a few moments after she was
raped.
Aside from this circumstantial evidence derived from facts perfectly proven,
there is in addition the testimony of Ana Macatangay, who, on going to the river
bank where the offended girl was engaged in washing clothes, surprised the
defendant, whom she already knew, and recognized him while he was on top of her
granddaughter in the act of lying with her in spite of the girl’s resistance,
wherefore, when the defendant ran away this witness pursued him, her indignity
having been aroused by the unlawful act she had seen.
The offended girl denied the defendant’s allegation that for the past two
years he had had amorous relations with her, likewise the facts stated by the
two witnesses for the defense, and also that she had given to the defendant the
wearing apparel exhibited by the defense to prove the certainty of such
relations, which clothes, she testified, had been stolen from her house at a
time when the inmates thereof were absent. In default of proof to support the
allegations made by the defendant and his counsel, the conclusion is reached
that the crime of rape was committed and that the defendant did succeed in lying
with the offended girl through means of intimidation, effected by showing her a
pocketknife, with which he was provided, and by using brutal force, in that he
caught her in his arms, stretched her out on the ground and consummated the
coition in such a situation that the offended girl could not prevent it,
although she opposed tenacious resistance. The struggle that took place during
the act of the commission of the offense, appears fully proven by the injuries
borne by the aggrieved party and by the further fact that when she presented
herself before the barrio lieutenant her hair was disheveled and was, like her
face and the skirt she wore, soiled with earth.
The crime is comprised, within article 438 of the Penal Code, and the
defendant’s guilt, as the sole perpetrator by direct participation, has been
fully proven beyond all reasonable doubt.
No extenuating or aggravating circumstance attended the commission of the
crime, inasmuch as there is no proof that the place where the criminal act was
perpetrated was isolated and uninhabited; and it would not be proper to apply
the special circumstance mentioned in article 11 of the Penal Code and in the
Act which amended it, inasmuch as the defendant’s lack of culture and education
cannot serve as an extenuation for the application of the penalty fixed by law
for the crime in question, and therefore such penalty should be applied in its
medium degree.
For the foregoing reasons, and notwithstanding the allegations contained in
the brief filed by the defendant’s counsel, the judgment appealed from, which is
in accord with the merits of the case, should be affirmed; provided, however,
that the defendant shall be sentenced to the penalty of fourteen years, eight
months and one day of reclusion temporal, and, with this modification,
all the pronouncements contained in said judgment are affirmed.
The costs shall be assessed against the appellant. So ordered.
Arellano, C. J., Carson, Araullo, Malcolm, and Avanceña,
JJ., concur.
Street, J., dissented.