PEOPLE v ERINIA

G.R. No. L-26298; Jan 20, 1927;

Ostrand, J.

FACTS
 Appeal from a judgment of CFI finding DEF guilty of consummated rape
 Victim of rape was a child of 3 yrs and 11 mos old and the evidence is conclusive
that DEF endeavored to have carnal intercourse with her
 But there’s doubt whether he succeeded in penetrating the vagina before being
disturbed by the timely intervention of the child’s mother and sister.
 Physician who examined the child’s vagina a few hours after the commission of
crime found a slight inflammation of exterior parts, indicating that an effort had
been made to enter vagina
o But in testifying before the court he expressed doubts as to whether entry
had been effected
 Mama of the child testified that she found the vagina covered with a sticky
substance
o But that cannot be considered conclusive evidence of penetration
 It has been suggested that:
o Child was of such tender age that penetration was impossible
o That the crime of rape was impossible of consummation, therefore the
offense committed should be treated only as abusos dishonestos
 SC does not agree.
o It’s probably true that a complete penetration was impossible, but such
penetration is not essential to the commission of crime; it’s sufficient if
there is a penetration of the labia
o Kenny v. State: offended party was a child of 3 yrs and 8 mos; the
testimony of physicians was to the effect that the labia of the privates of a
child of that age can be entered by a man’s male organ to the hymen; DEF
was found guilty of consummated rape
 There being no conclusive evidence of penetration of the genital organ of the
offended party, DEF is entitled to benefit of the doubt and can only be found
guilty of frustrated rape
o But in view of the fact that he was living in the house of the parents of the
child as their guest, the aggravating circumstance of abuse of confidence
existed and the penalty must therefore be imposed in its maximum degree