PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. VICTORINO REYES, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

People versus Reyes

The Case

This is the People of the Philippines against Victorino Reyes, a criminal appeal from a conviction for rape. Reyes was accused of forcing carnal knowledge upon AAA, a thirteen-year-old neighbor, in her barangay in Pangasinan on the evening of December 26, 1996. The case matters because it settles a question that examiners love: whether an intact hymen defeats a charge of rape. The Court answers with a single, memorable rule — the slightest penetration of the labia of the female victim's genitalia consummates the crime of rape.

Procedural History

Reyes was arraigned before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 53, in Rosales, Pangasinan, and pleaded not guilty. After trial on the merits, the trial court, in its decision of April 23, 2001, convicted him of rape as charged, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, and ordered him to indemnify AAA in the amount of 75,000 pesos. Reyes appealed to the Court of Appeals. On April 20, 2006, the Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction in full. Reyes then elevated the matter to the Supreme Court by appeal, and the Supreme Court decided the case on July 17, 2013.

Facts

At around seven o'clock in the evening of December 26, 1996, AAA and her nine-year-old sister, BBB, watched television at the house of Reyes, which stood just across the street from their own. Only Reyes and his two young sons were home, his wife having gone to another barangay to sell refreshments. By nine o'clock, the sisters rose to go home. As they were leaving, Reyes suddenly pulled AAA into the store attached to the sala of his house, telling her in the dialect to come and have sex with him. AAA struggled. BBB pulled at her sister to save her, but Reyes's superior strength prevailed, and BBB was left outside the store, crying.

Inside the store, Reyes kissed AAA, mashed her breasts, and threatened to kill her if she shouted. He pulled down her long pants and panties below her knees, took out his penis, grabbed her by the waist, and anchored her back against a nearby table. She fought back by boxing and pushing him, but her efforts were futile. He twice tried to pry open her legs, and she strained hard to close them. On the second attempt, her effort was not enough. He pulled her legs apart and thrust his penis into her vagina, making push and pull movements. His penis achieved only a slight penetration of her vagina, but he succeeded in satisfying his lust, as later confirmed when her mother found semen on AAA's panties. Before the sisters left, Reyes threatened to kill them both should they tell anyone.

When AAA reached home, her mother noticed her fear and saw her take out fresh panties. Inspecting the soiled underwear, the mother found it wet with semen. Under questioning, AAA admitted that Reyes had raped her. The next morning, December 27, 1996, the mother reported the rape to the Barangay Chairman, who accompanied AAA and her father to the Balungao Police Station. A medical examination conducted that afternoon by the Municipal Health Officer of Rosales showed a contusion on the labia majora, both right and left, with no hymenal lacerations noted, and with one examining finger having difficulty penetrating the vaginal canal. An information dated February 3, 1997 charged Reyes with rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. At trial, Reyes admitted that the sisters had watched television in his house but insisted he had been sleeping on the sofa from 7:30 in the evening until 2:30 the next morning, and he pointed to the intact hymen as proof that AAA was still a virgin.

Issues

• Whether or not the Court should depart from the findings of fact of the trial court, affirmed by the Court of Appeals, that the testimonies of AAA and BBB were credible and reliable.
• Whether or not the evidence proved that the crime of rape was consummated, despite the medical finding that AAA's hymen remained intact.
• Whether or not the civil liability imposed by the trial court should be modified in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.

Applicable Provisions

Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 11 of Republic Act No. 7659, the law applicable at the time of the rape, provides:

Article 335. When and how rape is committed. Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: 1. By using force or intimidation; 2. When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and 3. When the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented. The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.

This is the provision the Court construes, and its text shows that the breaking of the hymen is not among the means of consummating rape; all the law requires is carnal knowledge under the circumstances described.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the appeal had no merit. Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals unanimously found the testimonies of AAA and BBB credible and reliable. It was therefore incumbent on Reyes to come forward with a good reason to depart from the age-old rule according conclusiveness to the findings of the trial court, which the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Court is not a trier of facts and depends on the trial court's findings by virtue of its direct access to the witnesses as they testified. Only when the appellant convincingly demonstrates that those findings were erroneous, biased, unfounded, incomplete, unreliable, or conflicted with the findings of the Court of Appeals would the Court assume the rare role of a trier of facts. Reyes made no such demonstration.

On the second issue, the Court rejected the argument that the intact hymen proved no rape. As the text of the law itself shows, the breaking of the hymen is not among the means of consummating rape. All that the law requires is that the accused had carnal knowledge of a woman under the circumstances described in the law. By definition, carnal knowledge is the act of a man having sexual bodily connections with a woman. This understanding explains why the slightest penetration of the female genitalia consummates the crime. The swelling on AAA's labia majora, though susceptible of different interpretations standing alone, was confirmed by her testimonial narration of how Reyes's penis slightly penetrated her vagina. The Court quoted its own teaching:

In objective terms, carnal knowledge, the other essential element in consummated statutory rape, does not require full penile penetration of the female. The Court has clarified in People v. Campuhan that the mere touching of the external genitalia by a penis capable of consummating the sexual act is sufficient to constitute carnal knowledge. All that is necessary to reach the consummated stage of rape is for the penis of the accused capable of consummating the sexual act to come into contact with the lips of the pudendum of the victim. This means that the rape is consummated once the penis of the accused capable of consummating the sexual act touches either labia of the pudendum. As the Court has explained in People v. Bali-balita, the touching that constitutes rape does not mean mere epidermal contact, or stroking or grazing of organs, or a slight brush or a scrape of the penis on the external layer of the victim's vagina, or the mons pubis, but rather the erect penis touching the labias or sliding into the female genitalia. Accordingly, the conclusion that touching the labia majora or the labia minora of the pudendum constitutes consummated rape proceeds from the physical fact that the labias are physically situated beneath the mons pubis or the vaginal surface, such that for the penis to touch either of them is to attain some degree of penetration beneath the surface of the female genitalia. It is required, however, that this manner of touching of the labias must be sufficiently and convincingly established.

On the third issue, the Court affirmed reclusion perpetua because the crime was simple rape, but revised the civil liability to accord with jurisprudence. Civil indemnity of 50,000 pesos and moral damages of 50,000 pesos should be awarded to the victim of simple rape without need of proof other than the fact of rape, because she unquestionably suffered actual loss and moral injuries. In addition, AAA's minority, though not a proper basis to raise the penal sanction on account of the failure to allege it in the information, justified exemplary damages of 30,000 pesos to set a public example and to establish a deterrent against elders who abuse and corrupt the youth. Exemplary damages are justified regardless of whether the aggravating circumstances are alleged in the information, since their grant under Article 2230 of the Civil Code is for the sole benefit of the victim and does not affect criminal liability, the exclusive concern of the State.

Doctrine

First, the slightest penetration of the labia of the female victim's genitalia consummates the crime of rape. The breaking of the hymen is not an element of rape, and an intact hymen does not negate carnal knowledge. Second, carnal knowledge does not require full penile penetration; the mere touching of the external genitalia by a penis capable of consummating the sexual act is sufficient, provided the touching is not mere epidermal contact, stroking, grazing, or a slight brush, but the erect penis touching the labia or sliding into the female genitalia, and provided this manner of touching is sufficiently and convincingly established. Third, findings of fact of the trial court, especially on the credibility of witnesses, are accorded conclusiveness, and the Supreme Court will not act as a trier of facts absent a convincing demonstration that the findings were erroneous, biased, unfounded, incomplete, unreliable, or in conflict with those of the Court of Appeals. Fourth, in simple rape, civil indemnity of 50,000 pesos and moral damages of 50,000 pesos are awarded without need of proof other than the fact of rape, and exemplary damages of 30,000 pesos may be awarded where the victim's minority attends the crime, even if not alleged in the information.

Disposition

The Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals convicting Victorino Reyes of simple rape and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, with the modification that he pay AAA 50,000 pesos as civil indemnity, 50,000 pesos as moral damages, and 30,000 pesos as exemplary damages, plus interest of six percent per annum from the finality of the decision, with costs of suit against him.

Remember This

Memorize the line: the slightest penetration of the labia of the female victim's genitalia consummates the crime of rape. Examiners use this case to test whether an intact hymen or the absence of full penetration defeats a rape charge, and to test the award of civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages in simple rape.