G.R. No. 7081 , September 7, 1912
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TAN TENG, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The defendant, Tan Teng, was charged with the crime of rape against Oliva Pacomio, a seven-year-old girl. The complaint alleged that on or about September 15, 1910, in Manila, he willfully and forcibly had carnal intercourse with her. After trial, the lower court convicted him of the lesser crime of abusos deshonestos (indecent abuses) under Article 439 of the Penal Code and sentenced him to 4 years, 6 months, and 11 days of prision correccional. The defendant appealed, assigning errors primarily concerning the admissibility of evidence related to a venereal disease. The evidence showed that the defendant followed the victim into her room, used face powder on his private parts, threw her to the floor, and placed his private parts upon hers. Weeks later, the victim was found to have gonorrhea. The defendant was later identified by the victim, arrested, and medically examined. A substance taken from his body without his objection was analyzed by the Bureau of Science and confirmed he had gonorrhea. Medical experts testified that the disease could have been transmitted through the contact described by the victim.

ISSUE

1. Whether the lower court erred in admitting evidence obtained from the medical examination of the defendant (specifically the substance taken from his body and its analysis) as violative of the constitutional right against self-incrimination.
2. Whether the evidence sufficiently established the defendant’s guilt for the crime of abusos deshonestos.

RULING

The Supreme Court AFFIRMED the conviction but MODIFIED the penalty. The Court held:
1. On the admissibility of evidence: The lower court did not err in admitting the evidence from the medical examination. The substance was taken from the defendant’s body without compulsion for testimonial evidence; he was not forced to make any admissions or answer questions. The Court analogized this to the admissibility of stolen property or blood-stained clothing taken from an accused, which does not violate the privilege against self-incrimination. The evidence was considered physical or real evidence, not testimonial compulsion. The constitutional protection applies to extorting confessions or declarations, not to the examination of the body itself.
2. On the sufficiency of evidence: The evidence, including the credible testimony of the victim (whose competence was properly assessed by the trial court), the medical findings of gonorrhea in both the defendant and the victim, and the expert testimony on transmission, sufficiently established the defendant’s guilt for abusos deshonestos under Article 439 of the Penal Code. The Court found the victim’s account credible and the defense of extortion (that the case was brought to force a P60 payment) unconvincing.
3. On the penalty: Considering the crime was committed in the victim’s dwelling, the Supreme Court imposed the maximum penalty provided by law. The sentence was modified to six (6) years of prision correccional, with costs against the appellant.