Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Elements:
3. As regards the man with whom she has sexual intercourse, he must know her
to be married.
The gist of the crime is the danger of introducing spurious heirs into the
family.
The offended party must be legally married to the offender at the time of
the criminal case.
A married man who is not liable for adultery because he did not know that
the woman was married, may be held liable for concubinage. If the
woman knew that the man was married, she may be held liable for
concubinage as well.
The acquittal of one of the defendants does not operate as a cause for
acquittal of the other.
If the paramour dies, the offended wife may still be prosecuted because
the requirement that both offenders should be included in the complaint
applies only when both offenders are alive.
If the offended party dies, the proceedings must continue. This article
seeks to protect the honor and reputation not only of the living but of dead
persons as well.
Pardon of the offended parties must come BEFORE the institution of the
criminal prosecution, and both offenders must be pardoned by the
offended party.
Acts punishable:
Elements:
2. He is either –
c. Cohabiting with a woman who is not his wife in any other place;
A married man is NOT liable for concubinage for mere sexual relations
with a woman not his wife.
‘Keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling’ – no positive proof of actual
intercourse necessary.
Conjugal dwelling – the home of the husband and wife even if the wife
happens to be temporarily absent on any account.
The people in the vicinity are the best witnesses to prove scandalous
circumstances.
FACTS: Petitioner Meynardo Beltran and wife Charmaine E. Felix were married on June
16, 1973 at the Immaculate Concepcion Parish Church in Cubao, Quezon City. On
February 7, 1997, after twenty-four years of marriage and four children, petitioner filed a
petition for nullity of marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity under Article 36
of the Family Code before Branch 87 of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City. The
case was docketed as Civil Case No. Q-97-30192. In her Answer to the said petition,
petitioner's wife Charmaine Felix alleged that it was petitioner who abandoned the
conjugal home and lived with a certain woman named Milagros Salting. Charmaine
subsequently filed a criminal complaint for concubinage under Article 334 of the
Revised Penal Code against petitioner and his paramour. Petitioner contends that there
is a possibility that two conflicting decisions might result from the civil case for
annulment of marriage and the criminal case for concubinage. In the civil case, the trial
court might declare the marriage as valid by dismissing petitioner's complaint but in the
criminal case, the trial court might acquit petitioner because the evidence shows that his
marriage is void on the ground of psychological incapacity.
HELD: Parties to the marriage should not be permitted to judge for themselves its
nullity, for the same must be submitted to the judgment of the competent courts and
only when the nullity of the marriage is so declared can it be held as void, and so long
as there is no such declaration the presumption is that the marriage exists for all intents
and purposes. Therefore, he who cohabits with a woman not his wife before the judicial
declaration of nullity of the marriage assumes the risk of being prosecuted for
concubinage.
Elements:
Committed by a Committed by a
private individual, public officer only
in most cases
Famularcano, a driver at the Camp John Hay, followed Dionisia after she alighted from
the truck. She took her by the waist, held her to his breast and private parts. She
resisted and was able to extricate herself. She then walked towards the house of her
friend, instead of going home.
When a complaint for acts of lasciviousness was filed against him, Famularcano
claimed that he had no intention of having sexual intercourse with her. He did the acts
a s a revenge for what Dionisia’s father did to his wife.
HELD: The accused cannot be convicted of frustrated acts of lasciviousness for under
the very terms of the law such frustration can never take place. In cases of acts of
lasciviousness, as in all cases of crimes against chastity like adultery and rape, from the
moment the offender performs all the elements necessary for the existence of the
felony, he actually attains his purpose, and from that moment, all the essential elements
of the offense have also been accomplished. Motive of revenge is of no consequence
since the essence of lewdness is in the very act itself. He was convicted of
consummated acts of lasciviousness.
FACTS: Sailito Perez y Gazo was charged with five counts of statutory rape against
Jobelyn Ramos his 11 year old niece. The accused interposed the defense of denial
and imputed ill-motive on the part of Jobelyn's mother which had led to the filing of the
criminal charges. The accused testified that during all the time that the incidents were
allegedly taking place, he was plying a tricycle to earn his living. The trial court
rendered judgment finding the accused guilty of the crime of Statutory Rape and guilty
of the offense of Acts of Lasciviousness.
HELD: The trial court correctly found appellant guilty of acts of lasciviousness. Appellant
was shrouded with lust in trying, although unsuccessfully, to get the young girl to suck
his penis.
The elements of this crime are that: (a) the offender commits any act of lasciviousness
or lewdness; (b) by using ford or intimidation, or when the offended party is deprived of
reason or otherwise unconscious, or the offended party is under 12 years of age. In acts
of lasciviousness, the acts complained of are prompted by lust or lewd design where the
victim has not encouraged such acts. In cases of acts of lasciviousness, the offender is
deemed to have accomplished all the elements necessary for the existence of the
felony once he has been able, by his overt acts, to actually achieve or attain his
purpose.
Article 337. Qualified seduction
Acts punishable:
Elements:
Person liable:
b. Guardian;
c. Teacher;
a. Priest;
b. House servant;
c. Domestic;
The fact that the girl gave her consent to the sexual intercourse is not a
defense, because lack of consent is not an element of the offense.
‘domestic’ – a person usually living under the same roof, pertaining to the
same house
Fe Castro, a fifteen-year old virgin, was brought by her mother to the house of the
appellant and his second wife to serve as a helper. Fe Castro testified that during her
stay in the house of Fontanilla for about three months the accused succeeded in having
carnal knowledge of her repeatedly, the total number of times she could not recall. She
was certain, however, that the accused consummated the first sexual intercourse with
her one night in September. She also declared that prior to this incident, the accused
had made amorous overtures and advances toward her. Aside from giving her money,
the accused repeatedly promised to abandon his wife to live with her. Fe Castro
repeatedly yielded to the carnal desires of the accused, as she was induced by his
promises of marriage and frightened by his acts of intimidation. Their intimacies lasted
for almost three months until her aunt, the wife of the accused, caught them in flagrante
on the kitchen floor. The following day she returned to her parents, and revealed
everything to her mother two days later. Fontanilla denies everything.
HELD: It was qualified seduction. Anent the said marital promise, Fontanilla also claims
that there is no evidence on record supporting its veracity. Granting this to be correct, it
is nevertheless settled that deceit, although an essential element of ordinary or simple
seduction, does not need to be proved or established 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 virgin over twelve and under eighteen years of age,
committed by any of the persons enumerated in Art. 337 "is constitutive of the crime of
qualified seduction . . . even though no deceit intervenes or even when such carnal
knowledge were voluntary on the part of the virgin, because in such a case, the law
takes for granted the existence of the deceit as an integral element of the said crime
and punishes it with greater severity than it does the simple seduction . . . taking into
account the abuse of confidence on the part of the agent (culprit), an abuse of
confidence which implies deceit or fraud."
Babanto, a policeman, brought Dagohoy, 13 years old and with low mentality, to the
ABC Hall where he succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her. Babanto was
charged with rape but convicted of qualified seduction.
HELD: The complaint filed alleged that the accused abused his position as policeman
by having carnal knowledge of a 13 year old girl. However, there is no allegation that
the complainant was a virgin. Though it is true that virginity is presumed if the girl is
over 12 but under 18, unmarried and of good reputation, virginity is still an essential
element of the crime of qualified seduction and must be alleged in the complaint. A
conviction of the crime of qualified seduction without the allegation of virginity would
violate the petitioner’s right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation
against him. Petitioner is guilty of rape, consider the victim’s age, mental abnormality
and deficiency. There was also sufficient intimidation with the accused wearing his
uniform.
Perez vs. CA
Perez was able to have sexual intercourse with Mendoza twice after he promised
marriage to her. As he did not make good on said promises, Mendoza filed a complaint
for Consented Abduction. The trial court found that the acts constituted seduction, and
so it acquitted him on the charge of consented abduction. Mendoza then filed a
complaint for qualified seduction. Perez moved to quash on the grounds of double
jeopardy.
HELD: There are similar elements between Consented Abduction and Qualified
Seduction, namely: (1) the offended party is a virgin, and (2) over 12 but under 18 years
of age. However, there are other elements which differentiate the two crimes. For
example, consented abduction requires the taking away of the victim without her
consent, while qualified seduction requires that there be abuse of authority, confidence
or relationship. Thus, an acquittal for Consented Abduction will not preclude the filing of
a charge for Qualified Seduction, because the elements of the two crimes are different.
Elements:
What about unfulfilled promise of material things, i.e. the woman agrees to
intercourse with a man who promised to give her jewelry? This is not
seduction, because she is a woman of loose morals. (she is a high-class
prostitute!)
FACTS: Liza and Anna Paragas, 12 year old twins, were sexually molested by a
neighbor Hipolito Pascua. Upon learning what the Pascua had done to her daughters,
Leticia, their mother, confronted them. Liza and Anna revealed that Pascua had
sexually abused them. Leticia wasted no time in reporting the matter to their barangay
chairman and to the police before whom she filed criminal complaints. On appeal,
Pascua argued that he should only be liable for simple seduction.
HELD: Under Article 338 of the Revised Penal Code, to constitute seduction, there must
in all cases be some deceitful promise or inducement. The woman should have yielded
because of this promise or inducement. In this case, the appellant claims that the acts
of sexual intercourse with the private complainants were in exchange for money. He
declared that, prior to every sexual intercourse with Liza and Anna, he would promise
them P20. However, aside from his bare testimony, the appellant presented no proof
that private complainants' consent was secured by means of such promise. As aptly
opined by the trial court, the money given by the appellant to private complainants was
not intended to lure them to have sex with him. Rather, it was for the purpose of buying
their silence to ensure that nobody discovered his dastardly acts. The evidence for the
prosecution was more than enough to show that the element of voluntariness on the
part of private complainants was totally absent. Liza and Anna's respective testimonies
established that the appellant had sexual intercourse with them without their consent
and against their will.
Article 339. Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the offended party
Elements:
2. The acts are committed upon a woman who is a virgin or single or widow
of good reputation, under 18 years of age but over 12 years, or a sister or
descendant, regardless of her reputation or age;
Acts of Acts of
lasciviousness lasciviousness
(Art. 336)
(Art. 339)
Who are liable: Any person. If the culprit is a public officer or employee, including
those in GOCCs, there is an additional penalty of temporary absolute disqualification
It is not necessary that the unchaste acts shall have been done on the
minor. What the law punishes is the act of a pimp who facilitates the
corruption of minors, NOT the performance of unchaste acts upon the
minor.
When the victim is under 12 years, the penalty is one degree higher
Acts punishable:
In any manner or under any pretext,
2. Profiting by prostitution;
When the victim is under 12 years, the penalty shall be one degree higher.
Elements:
1. The person abducted is any woman, regardless of her age, civil status, or
reputation;
Abduction – the taking away of a woman from her house or the place
where she may be for the purpose of carrying her to another place with
intent to marry or corrupt her
o Rape
o Forcible abduction
Where there are several defendants, it is enough that one of them had
lewd designs
Forcible Corruption of
abduction minors
HELD. Article 344 of the RPC and the Rules on Criminal Procedure require that the
offenses of abduction and rape and other offenses which cannot be prosecuted de
oficio shall not be prosecuted except upon complaint filed by the offended party. In the
CAB, it is admitted that the sworn complaint of the victim was not formally offered in
evidence by the prosecution. This failure to adhere to the rules however is not fatal and
did not oust the court of its jurisdiction to hear and decide the case.
This is the Maggie DeLa Riva story (wherein Maggie was abducted and brought to the
Swanky Hotel, where the four accused each took turns in raping her)
HELD: While the first act of rape was being performed, the crime of forcible abduction
had already been consummated, so that each of the three succeeding crimes of the
same nature cannot legally be considered as still connected with the abduction. In
other words, they should be detached from, and considered independently of, that of
forcible abduction, and therefore, the former can no longer be complexed with the latter.
As regards therefore, the complex crime of forcible abduction with rape, the first of the
crimes committed, the latter is definitely the more serious crime. Hence, pursuant to
Article 48, the penalty prescribed shall be imposed in the maximum period.
Consequently, the accused should suffer the extreme penalty of death. No need to
consider aggravating circumstances for the same would not alter the nature of the
penalty imposed.
People vs. Alburo
Alburo and 2 other men raped Evelyn Cantina. She was a jeepney passenger when
she was prevented from leaving the jeepney, taken to a remote place and was raped
there.
HELD: They are guilty of the complex crime of FORCIBLE ABDUCTION WITH RAPE.
In reviewing the evidence adduced by the prosecution for this crime of Rape, we have
likewise been guided by three well-known principles, namely, (1) that an accusation
of rape can be made with facility, is difficult to prove, but more difficult for the
person accused, though innocent, to disprove; (2) that in view of the intrinsic
nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved, the
testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (3)
that the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits, and
cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weaknesses of the evidence for the
defense.
The factual milieu of this criminal charge before us gives us no reason to depart from
these established rules. On the contrary, we find that Appellant had taken Evelyn away
against her will, with lewd designs, subsequently forced her to submit to his lust and
rendering her unconscious in the process, thereby justifying his conviction for the
complex crime of Forcible Abduction with Rape under Article 48 in relation to Articles
335 and 342 of the Revised Penal Code, with which he has herein been charged.
Ancajas witnessed the killing of Vilaksi by the 2 accused. The accused, upon seeing
her with her baby, dragged her to a vacant lot where they took turns in raping her. Trial
court convicted them of the crime of rape.
HELD: TC correctly held that forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape if the
main objective of the accused is to rape the victim.
When Magdalena arrived at their house, Ailene Villaflores, her uncle's sister-in-law,
noticed that she looked pale and weak, and found traces of blood on her dress.
Magdalena confessed that she was raped by a man who had a scar on the stomach. Dr.
Nilda Baylon, the Medico-Legal Officer who examined Magdalena, found that the latter's
hymen was completely lacerated, thus confirming that she had indeed been raped.
Ablaneda was charged before the RTC, with the complex crime of Forcible Abduction
with Rape. He was found guilty.
HELD: All the elements of forcible abduction are present in this case. The victim, who is
a woman, was taken against her will, as shown by the fact that she was intentionally
directed by accused-appellant to a vacant hut. At her tender age, Magdalena could not
be expected to physically resist considering that the lewd designs of accused-appellant
could not have been apparent to her at that time. The employment of deception suffices
to constitute the forcible taking, especially since the victim is an unsuspecting young
girl. Considering that it was raining, going to the hut was not unusual to Magdalena, as
probably the purpose was to seek shelter. Barrio girls are particularly prone to
deception. It is the taking advantage of their innocence that makes them easy culprits of
deceiving minds. Finally, the evidence shows that the taking of the young victim against
her will was effected in furtherance of lewd and unchaste designs. Such lewd designs in
forcible abduction is established by the actual rape of the victim.
FACTS: On October 4, 1997, Emelina Ornos, then fifteen (15) years old visited her aunt
Josephine to spend the night. While in her aunt's house, Emelina was invited by one
Sajer to a dance party to be held at the barangay basketball court. Emelina accepted
the invitation and at around seven o'clock in the evening of the same day, she went to
the party, accompanied by her aunt. Josephine then left Emelina at the party, telling her
that she had to go home but she would return later to fetch her.
Emelina decided to go home alone. On her way to her aunt's house, Emelina was
accosted by Gerry Lining and Lian Salvacion. Lining poked a kitchen knife at Emelina's
breast and the two held her hands. Emelina was dragged towards the ricefield and was
forcibly carried to an unoccupied house where she was raped by both men.
The next day, Gerry Selda, a friend of her father, saw her crying. She told him about the
rape incident and Selda accompanied her to the police. The Chief of Police immediately
ordered the arrest of Lining but Salvacion was able to escape. After trial, the court found
Gerry Lining guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of forcible abduction with
rape, and for another count of rape.
HELD: Accused-appellant could only be convicted for the crime of rape, instead of the
complex crime of forcible abduction with rape. Indeed, it would appear from the records
that the main objective of the accused when the victim was taken to the house of Mila
Salvacion was to rape her. Hence, forcible abduction is absorbed in the crime of rape.
Elements:
3. Offender takes her away with her consent, after solicitation or cajolery;
Purpose of the law: to prescribe punishment for the disgrace to her family
and the alarm caused therein by the disappearance of one who is, by her
age and sex, susceptible to cajolery and deceit.
If the virgin is under 12, the crime is forcible abduction. (because law
assumes that a person of such age cannot give consent, so this also
applies to those deprived of reason)
The taking away of the girl need not be with some character of
permanence.
When there was no solicitation or cajolery and no deceit and the girl
voluntarily went with the man, there is no crime committed even if they
had sexual intercourse.
b. her parents
c. her grandparents or
The right to file action of the parents, grandparents and guardian shall be
exclusive of other persons and shall be exercised successively in the
order provided.
When the offended party is a minor, her parents may file the complaint.
When the offended party is of age and is in complete possession of her
mental or physical faculties, she alone can file the complaint.
Rape complexed with another crime against chastity need not be signed
by the offended woman, since rape is a public crime.
When the evidence fails to prove a complex crime of rape with another
crime, and there is no complaint signed by the offended woman, the
accused cannot be convicted of rape.
Marriage must be entered into in good faith and with the intent of fulfilling
the marital duties and obligations.
Geiling, a German, was able to obtain a decree of divorce in Germany against his wife
Pilapil, a Filipina. Five months after the issuance of the divorce decree, Geiling filed 2
complaints for adultery against Pilapil.
She challenged the complaint on the ground that the complainant, her husband, does
not qualify as an offended spouse having obtained a final divorce decree under his
national law prior to his filing the criminal complaint.
HELD: The crime of adultery, as well as four other crimes against chastity, cannot be
prosecuted except upon a sworn written complaint filed by the offended spouse. It has
long since been established, with unwavering consistency, that compliance with this rule
is a jurisdictional, and not merely a formal, requirement. Now, the law specifically
provides that in prosecutions for adultery and concubinage the person who can legally
file the complaint should be the offended spouse, and nobody else. Unlike the offenses
of seduction, abduction, rape and acts of lasciviousness, no provision is made for the
prosecution of the crimes of adultery and concubinage by the parents, grandparents or
guardian of the offended party. The so-called exclusive and successive rule in the
prosecution of the first four offenses do not apply to adultery and concubinage.
It necessarily follows that such initiator must have the status, capacity or legal
representation to do so at the time of the filing of the criminal action. Lack of legal
capacity to sue, as a ground for a motion to dismiss in civil cases, is determined as of
the filing of the complaint or petition.
Hence, with reference to adultery cases, the status of the complainant vis-à-vis the
accused must be determined as of the time the complaint was filed. The person who
initiates the adultery case must be an offended spouse, and by this is meant that HE IS
STILL MARRIED to the accused spouse, at the time of the filing of the complaint.
The divorce obtained by Geiling and its legal effects may be recognized in the Phils. In
view of the nationality principle in our civil law on the matter of status of persons.
(Aliens of Filipino spouses may obtain divorces abroad, which may be recognized in the
Phils. if they are valid according to their national law._
Being no longer the husband of Pilapil, Geiling had no legal standing to commence the
adultery case under the imposture that he was the offended spouse at the time he filed
the suit.
2. To acknowledge the offspring, unless the law shall prevent him from so doing;
All offenders in multiple rape must support the offspring, as any one of
them may be the father.
Under the Civil Code, judgment to recognize the offspring may only be
given if there is pregnancy within the period of conception, which is within
120 days from the commission of the offense (Article 283)
1. ascendants
2. guardians
3. curators
4. teachers