CRIMES AGAINST CHASTITY

A) Qualified Seduction

People v. Fontanilla (1968)

Doctrine: Deceit, although an essential element of ordinary or simple seduction, does not
need to be proved in a charge of qualified seduction. It is replaced by abuse of confidence.

When the offender is a public officer, a priest or minister, home-servant, domestic, guardian,
tutor, teacher, or any person who is entrusted with the custody or education of the woman
seduced (12-18 y/o virgin), the act is punishable although fraud or deceit may not have been
employed or proved.

Brief: Fontanilla was accused to have had repeated carnal knowledge with Fe Castro, his 15
y/o helper and niece-in-law. The Supreme Court gave credence to Castros testimony and
found accused guilty of qualified seduction.

Facts: On September 1960, Fe Castro, a 15-year old virgin, was brought to her

aunt (Mariano Fontanillas wife), to serve as a helper

Castro Fontanilla

He could not have taken advantage of her

From September to shortly before Christmas of
chastity because her room was locked at
1960, Fontanilla succeeded in having carnal
night and he was out in the farm during
knowledge of her repeatedly, with the first
the day.
sexual intercourse about a week after her arrival
when he intruded into her room. She claimed
His sexual capabilities have waned
that the lock did not prevent him from entering,
considerably because of his old age (52).
and that prior to that night he had made
He made love to his wife only once a
amorous advances. Aside from giving her money,
week, so he could not have had sex with
he also repeatedly promised to abandon his wife
Castro twice daily.
to live with her.
He claims that Avelino Gapasin, Castros
She yielded to him because she was induced by uncle, malevolently instigated Castro to
his promises of marriage and frightened by his file the case, which was indirectly
acts of intimidation. corroborated by Mayor Aquinos
testimony: Gapasin refused the proposed
He would make love to her during the day when
P50 settlement and asked for 2k for the
his wife was away and at night
honor destroyed.

When the latter was asleep. This lasted for 3 He also claims that she was envious of
months until his wife caught them in flagrante his children of his first marriage who
on the kitchen floor. were already earning salaries.

Magdalena Copio, wife of accused, denied

 having caught them in flagrante. She
also testified that she slept from 7pm to
12mn after which she seldom could go
back to sleep, and that she was easily
awakened by the slightest noise.

Fontanilla challenges the jurisdiction of the court a quo in this appeal.1) Crime was
committed in San Juan outside the territorial jurisdiction of the court a quo2) Original
jurisdiction for qualified seduction belongs exclusively to CFI

SUBSTANTIVE ISSUESIssue: WON the lower court erred in finding the accused guilty
of qualified seduction in relying heavily on Castros testimony and credibility despite the lack
of evidence of the carnal actHeld: NORatio: The atmosphere of secrecy and privacy which
pervades the commission of crimes against chastity, coupled with the consequent dearth or
even absence of witnesses, constrains the courts to rely in no small measure upon the
uncorroborated testimony of the complaining woman whose testimonial and personal
credibility assumes pivotal importance.

1. Gapasin refusal of the P50 settlement offer of Mayor Aquino was only done to protect his
nieces interests, because the amount would not be enough to cover expenses for the child
that Castro mistakenly thought she conceived. Mayor Aquino also admitted that he requested
the Fiscal to postpone the filing of the complaint to enable him to settle the case, showing
that the filing of the case preceded, and was not due to the failure of the proposed compromise.

2. Even though there is no evidence to support the claim of marital promise, deceit, although
an essential element in ordinary or simple seduction, does not need to be proved in a charge
of qualified seduction. It is replaced by abuse of confidence. When the offender is a public
officer, a priest or minister, a servant, domestic, tutor, teacher, or under any title is in charge
of the education or keeping of the offended woman, as in the present case, the act is
punishable although fraud or deceit may not have been used or, if employed, has not been
proved. The seduction of a 12-18 year old virgin, committed by any of the persons enumerated
in Art 337, constitutes qualified seduction even though there is no deceit or even when the
carnal act was voluntary.

3. Inconsistencies in her testimony could be attributed to minority, lack of education,

perceptively low IQ, and to the understandable partiality of a litigant to her cause.

4. When asked what time they had sex and Castro replied day and night, this refers to the
time when they engaged in carnal intercourse, not to the frequency. There is

also a presumption that an adult male has normal powers of virility and one who claims the
contrary must bolster it with the aid of an expert witness.

5. According to the physician who examined Castro, her hymen showed incomplete healed
lacerations suggesting that the injury happened 6 months prior to the medical examination,
which corresponds to the time Castro stayed as a helper. There is no evidence that Castro
was unchaste prior to her stay with the Fontanillas, and presumption of virginity arises when
it is shown that she is single, and continues until overthrown by proof to the contrary.
Dispositive:AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Moral damages increased from 500 to 2500
to Castro AND her parents.

Perez v. Court of Appeals (1988)

Doctrine: In cases of seduction, abduction, rape and acts of lasciviousness, pardon by the
offended party must be expressly given.

Brief: Petitioner Perez was acquitted after being charged with Consented Abduction.
Complainant then filed another case for Qualified Seduction which petitioner challenged as
violative of his constitutional right against double jeopardy. SC held that there is no double
jeopardy since the two offenses do not have identical elements and that pardon by the accused
must be express to bar a complaint for seduction.

Facts: Yolanda Mendoza filed a criminal complaint against Eleuterio Perez for Consented
Abduction wherein the accused was convicted.

On appeal, CA reversed the decision and acquitted the accused. The appellate court opined
that appellant may have been guilty for a different crime. Specifically, with promises of
marriage, appellant succeeded in having sexual intercourse with the woman, twice, that
night before they returned. She was seduced by the appellant but it turned out that he made
those promises just to accomplish his lewd designs. That was seduction and not abduction.

Subsequent to this acquittal, Yolanda filed another complaint for qualified seduction.
Petitioner moved to quash the complaint invoking double jeopardy but was denied. Hence,
this petition.

SUBSTANTIVE ISSUESIssue: WON the complaint for qualified seduction could prosper
against petitioner

Held: Yes

Ratio:

The rule on double jeopardy is that, No person shall be twice put in jeopardy of punishment
for the same offense The term same offense means identical offense or any attempt to
commit the same or frustration thereof or any offense which necessarily includes or is
necessarily included in the offense charged in the former complaint or information.

In the case at bar, petitioner maintains that since the same evidence would support charges
for both offenses, a trial and conviction for one, after he was acquitted for the other, would
constitute double jeopardy. But an examination of the elements of these two crimes would
show that although they may have arisen from the same set of facts, they are not identical
offenses. There are similar elements between Consented Abduction and Qualified Seduction,
namely:
(1) that the offended party is a virgin, and,

(2) that she must be over 12 and under 18 years of age. However, two elements differentiate
the two crimes. Consented Abduction requires that:

(1) the taking away of the offended party must be with her consent, after solicitation or
cajolery from the offender, and, (2) the taking away of the offended party must be with lewd
designs. On the other hand, an information for Qualified Seduction requires that:

(1) the crime be committed by abuse of authority, confidence or relationship, and,

(2) the offender has sexual intercourse with the woman.

Petitioner also avers that Yolanda is barred by waiver and/or estoppel for having considered
the case as Consented Abduction and that her delay of more than 9 years before filing the
second case is tantamount to pardon by the offended party. This is unmeritorious since the
act of filing the second case within the prescriptive period of 10 years belies the allegation
the she has waived or is estopped from filing the second charge. Neither could she be deemed
to have pardoned him for the rules require that in cases of seduction, abduction, rape and
acts of lasciviousness, pardon by the offended party must be expressly given.

Dispositive:Petition denied. CA decision is AFFIRMED.

B) Acts of Lasciviousness

Sombilon v. People (2009)

FACTS:
Jovelyn Puerin, 15 year old minor, was investigated by Appellant at the Calinan Police
Station, Davao City in connection with a complaint of theft. Jovelyn alleged that Appellant,
in conducting the investigation, took her inside a room and locked it. They stayed in the room
for an hour where the appellant electrocuted and sexually molested Jovelyn.

Thereafter, they went out of the room where appellant announced to P03 Mendez and Aileen
Dagic that she already admitted having stolen the necklace. The police officer allowed
Jovelyn and her mother to go home on the condition that they would pay the value of the
necklace.

Because Jovelyn was trembling and crying, Mrs. Puerin brought her to the Medical Clinic of
St. Luke where she was given a tranquilizer in order to clam down. Upon regaining
composure, she revealed that she was electrocuted and sexually molested by petitioner.

The petitioner was then charged with the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness, under Art. 336, in
relation to Art. 344 of the RPC.

RTC Davao: Guilty of acts of lasciviousness with aggravating circumstance of petitioners

taking advantage of his public position. CA: Affirmed
Petitioners defense:
As he admits merely touching the victim, petitioner argues that the act of touching did
not constitute lewdness.
He could only be convicted of unjust vexation.
While the victim was being touched, the latter tried to cover her body with her arms.
The police station does not favor the perpetration of the crime of acts of lasciviousness.

ISSUE: WON Sombilon, Jr. is guilty of acts of lasciviousness.

HELD: YES!

Under Art. 336 of the RPC, the elements of Acts of lasciviousness are as follows:
(1) the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness;
(2) the act of lasciviousness is committed against a person of either sex;
(3) It is done under the following circumstances:
a) By using force or intimidation;
b) When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious;
c) By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; or
d) When the offended party is under 12 years of age or is demented.

The term lewd is commonly defined as something indecent or obscene; it is characterized

by or intended to excite crude sexual desire. What constitutes lewd or lascivious conduct must
be determined from the circumstance of each case.

The petitioners acts of kissing the victim, fondling her breast and touching her private parts
constitutes lascivious conduct and cannot be viewed as mere unjust vexation. The intention
of the petitioner was not merely to annoy or irritate the victim nor to force her to confess the
theft. He could have easily achieved that when he electrocuted the latter. Instead, petitioner
intended to gratify his sexual desires.

Also, it is not necessary that the intimidation be irresistible. It being sufficient that some
compulsion equivalent to intimidation annuls or subdues the free exercise of the will of the
offended party. Here, the victim was locked inside a windowless room together with her
aggressor who poked a gun at her forehead. Even a grown man would be paralyzed with fear
if threatened at gunpoint, what more the hapless victim who was only 15 years old when she
was subjected to such atrocity.

The presence of other policemen on duty and of the victim's mother outside the room where
the incident took place does not render commission of the offense impossible. It has been
shown that there was a room in the precinct which, except for two doors which could be
locked, was totally enclosed.

Since the generic aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of public position was not
alleged in the information, it cannot be appreciated as an aggravating circumstance.
Consequently, the penalty imposed must be modified.
Perez v. Court of Appeals (2002)

FACTS:
March 25, 1988: Julita Tria was in the kitchen doing the dishes when Adelmo Perez Y
Agustin appeared at her back with unzipped shorts and bare torso, embraced her and
warned not to make a sound or hell kill her

April 14, 1988 morning: After Julita was through with washing the dishes, she proceeded
to the bedroom to store away their, beddings. Suddenly Adelmo appeared pulling her by
the hand, embraced her from behind and held her breasts. He pulled her to the bamboo
bed, positioned himself on top of her and placed her hands behind her as he kissed her lips
and neck. She tried to avoid his kisses by moving her head from side to side. As she was
pinned, he managed to insert his right hand inside her t-shirt and bra and squeezed nipples.
Then, he tried to raise her balloon-like skirt with his right hand, inserted it inside her panty
and while making up and down motions. Adelm said: Sige na, pagbigyan mo na ako. She
then cried out Inay.

Eufemia Tria: She peeped into their window which was just a few meters from where she
was and there saw her daughter Julita lying flat on a bamboo bed with her skirt raised and
Adelmo on top of Julita as her hands pinned down. She then rushed to the room and found
Adelmo hiding under the bamboo bed. She thought of hacking him with a bolo but realized
she couldnt so she brought him to his parents house to tell them what happened.

Dr. Emmanuel Cortez-Asuncion: extent of injuries sustained by her and that the slight
physical injuries could have been caused by attempted rape

Adelmo: He invited Julita as they were already becoming intimate to the room where they
could not be seen by her mother. But, her mother called her and went into the room.
Sensing this, he stood up and hid under the bed.

RTC: Attempted rape

CA: Affirmed

ISSUE: W/N there is attempted rape

HELD: NO. MODIFIED acts of lasciviousness

Under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code, there is an attempt when the offender
commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the
acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other
than his own spontaneous desistance.
In the crime of rape, penetration is an essential act of execution to produce the felony.
Thus, for there to be an attempted rape, the accused must have commenced the act of
penetrating his sexual organ to the vagina of the victim but for some cause or accident other
than his own spontaneous desistance, the penetration, however slight, is not completed.
There is no showing in this case that petitioners sexual organ had even touched
complainants vagina nor any part of her body.
acts constitute acts of lasciviousness. The elements of said crime are: (1) that the offender
 commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness; (2) that it is done (a) by using force and
intimidation or (b) when the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious,
or (c) when the offended party is under 12 years of age; and (3) that the offended party is
another person of either sex.

People v. Bonaagua (2011)

FACTS:

One afternoon, AAA (8 years old) was inside a room lying in bed. Her mother was not home.
Accused-appellant Ireno, AAAs biological father, entered the room. He approached her,
rolled her shirt upward, and removed her shorts and panty. She tried to resist by putting her
clothes back on, but her fathers strength prevailed. Thereafter, accused-appellant touched
and caressed her breasts, licked her vagina and inserted his finger into it. Later in the
evening, the accused-appellant raped AAA again in the same manner and under the same
circumstances. AAA did not tell her mother that she was raped because accused-appellant
threatened to kill her mother. In December 1999, AAA was raped by accused-appellant for
the third time. In December 2000, AAA was raped for the fourth and fifth time.

AAA suffered abdominal pail which prompted her mother to bring her to the hospital. The
results revealed that there was a healed superficial laceration at the 9 o clock position on the
hymen of AAA. This medical finding forced AAA to reveal to her mother all the incidents of
rape committed by accused-appellant.

The RTC ruled that Ireno was guilty of four counts of Rape. Aggrieved, Ireno appealed the
Decision before the CA, which convicted Ireno on 3 counts of Rape (Criminal Cases Nos. 03-
0254, 03-0256, and 03-0257) but found him guilty of one count of Acts of Lasciviousness
(Criminal Case No. 03-0255). Ireno now seeks the reversal of the decision.

Issues: 1. Whether or not the accused-appellant is convicted of the crime of Rape.

2. Whether or not the accused-appellant is convicted of Acts of Lasciviousness.

Ruling: Yes. It is well entrenched in this jurisdiction that when the offended parties are young
and immature girls, as in this case, courts are inclined to lend credence to their version of
what transpired, considering not only their relative vulnerability, but also the shame and
embarrassment to which they would be exposed if the matter about which they testified were
not true. A young girl would not usually concoct a tale of defloration; publicly admit having
been ravished and her honor tainted; had she not in fact been raped and been truly moved to
protect and preserve her honor, and motivated by the desire to obtain justice for the wicked
acts committed against her. The Court has repeatedly held that the lone testimony of the
victim in a rape case, if credible, is enough to sustain a conviction.

Moreover, the fact that AAA has only one healed laceration on her hymen does not prove that
rape did not happen. The medical findings clarified that only one laceration may be inflicted
although a finger is inserted into the vagina on separate instances which depend upon the
force exerted into the vagina and on whether or not the hymen is membranous or firm and
thick. A thick and firm hymen, which AAA has, is not easily lacerated and so a force exerted
into it on several occasions may cause only one laceration. Hence, Ireno has committed 3
counts of Rape through Sexual Assault. The offenses were committed with the
aggravating/qualifying circumstances of minority and relationship.

2. Yes. Acts of Lasciviousness, as defined in Article 336 of the RPC, has the following
elements:

(1) That the offender commits any act of lasciviousness or lewdness;

(2) That it is done under any of the following circumstances:
a. By using force or intimidation; or
b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; or
c. When the offended party is under 12 years of age; and
(3) That the offended party is another person of either sex.
In addition, the following elements of sexual abuse under Section 5, Article III of R.A. No.
7610 must be established:
1. The accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct.
2. The said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual
abuse.
3. The child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age.

All these elements are present. Ireno committed lascivious acts against AAA by touching her
breasts and licking her vagina and the lascivious or lewd acts were committed against AAA,
who was 8 years old at the time as established by her birth certificate. Thus, the CA correctly
found Ireno guilty of the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness.

Hence, Ireno is found guilty of 3 counts of Rape through Sexual Assault and 1 count of Acts
of Lasciviousness.