G.R. No. 129433 ; March 30, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff, vs. PRIMO CAMPUHAN Y BELLO, accused.

FACTS

On April 25, 1996, Corazon Pamintuan discovered the accused, Primo Campuhan, inside her children’s room kneeling before her four-year-old daughter, Crysthel. The child’s pants and panty were removed, and Campuhan’s short pants were down to his knees. Corazon testified that she saw Campuhan “forcing his penis into Crysthel’s vagina.” She immediately intervened, cursed him, and boxed him. Campuhan fled but was apprehended by responding relatives. A subsequent medico-legal examination of the child revealed an intact hymen with an orifice of only 0.5 cm in diameter and no signs of extra-genital physical injury. The accused, in his defense, claimed the incident was an accident where the child pulled him down while playing, and the accusation was fabricated due to the mother’s ill will.

ISSUE

Whether the crime committed is consummated rape or merely attempted rape, given the medical finding of an intact hymen and the absence of physical injury.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision and found the accused guilty of ATTEMPTED RAPE only. The legal logic hinges on the doctrinal requirement for consummated rape established in People v. Orita, which demands proof of any penetration of the female organ, however slight. This penetration is defined as the entry of the penis into the labia or lips of the female genitalia. The Court clarified that mere touching or contact with the external genitalia, without proof of entry or penetration, is insufficient for consummation. In this case, the prosecution evidence, primarily the mother’s testimony that she saw the accused “forcing his penis into” the vagina, was not corroborated by physical evidence. The medico-legal report showing an intact hymen and the small orifice size, while not conclusive, created reasonable doubt as to whether actual entry or penetration was achieved. The accused’s acts—undressing the child, positioning himself, and attempting insertion—constitute overt acts commencing the commission of rape but falling short of consummation due to the lack of proven penetration. The Court emphasized that to hold otherwise would blur the distinction between attempted and consummated rape, a distinction critical in capital offenses where the penalty difference is between reclusion temporal and death. Thus, the elements of attempted rape were satisfied, but consummation was not proven beyond reasonable doubt. The death penalty was vacated and the accused was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty.