People vs.

Quiñanola
G.R. No. 126148. May 5, 1999.

FACTS:
On May 5, 1994 (10pm) Catalina Carciller (15y/o) and her two male friends went to a dance party
in Sitio Bangag, Cebu. At around 11pm on their way home they stopped to rest on a shed beside the school
when Agapito Quinanola (member of the PNP) and Eduardo Escudero suddenly appeared with a gun.
Agapito forcibly took Catalina pointing the gun at her. Eduardo took the 2 boys, but the two boys were
able to escape. Agapito and Eduardo tricked Catalina into going at the back of the school where Agapito
with the aid of Eduardo raped Catalina - Eduardo held Catalina’s legs. They took turns in raping her.
After the incident, Catalina went home with a strange behavior and is in a state of shock.
Guillermo Zozobrado reported the incident to the police and Catalina was examined by the doctor.
However, the medical exam showed no evidence of extragenital physical injury and that the hymen was
not broken, and that the diameter of her orifice was too small to preclude complete penetration of an
average-size adult penis in erection without producing laceration.

Despite the alibi of the 2 accused, both were charged guilty with the crime of “frustrated rape”.

ISSUES:
1. Whether or not Catalina’s credibility is doubtful.
2. Whether or not the court erred in declaring them guilty of frustrated rape.

HELD:
1. No, Catalina’s candid and straightforward narration of the two sexual assaults perpetrated on her
on the night of the incident unmistakably deserves credence. It is unbelievable that a young barrio
lass would concoct a tale of defloration, publicly admit having been ravished and her honor
tainted, allow the examination of her private parts, and undergo all the trouble and
inconvenience, not to mention the trauma and scandal of a public trial, had she not in fact been
raped and truly moved to protect and preserve her honor, as well as to obtain justice, for the
wicked acts committed against her. Also, the Court has repeatedly said that the lone testimony of
the victim in a rape case, if credible, is enough to sustain a conviction. The accused may be
convicted on the sole basis of complainant’s testimony if credible and the findings of the medico-
legal officer do not disprove the commission of rape.
2. Yes, as declared in People v. Orita there is no such crime of frustrated rape. The medical
examination merely stated that the smallness of the vaginal orifice only precludes COMPLETE
penetration. This does not mean that rape has not been committed. Carnal knowledge need not
require the vagina be penetrated or the hymen to rupture. The crime of rape is consummated the
moment the penis enters the labia or the lips of the female organ or merely touching of the
external genitalia by the penis. A broken hymen is not a requirement in fact sometimes women
get pregnant without it getting broken. Partial penetration is as good as full penetration.