G.R. No. 18942 December 1, 1922
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. LEONCIO COLUMNA, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS

An information was filed charging defendants Mariano Lugero, Leoncio Columna, and others with abduction with force. The prosecution alleged that on May 25, 1921, in Noveleta, Cavite, the defendants, some armed with bolos and one with a revolver, forcibly abducted Miguela de los Reyes from her carromata on a public road, dragging her to a nearby rice field against her will. There, Leoncio Columna hugged, kissed, and touched her private parts, while others attempted to force her to the ground. Her cries for help attracted rescuers, causing the defendants to flee. The defendants presented a different version, claiming the incident began with an exchange of insults after Columna jokingly called the prosecutrix and her driver “spouses,” leading to a fight inside the carromata and later in a yard. The trial court convicted all defendants of abduction with force and sentenced each to fourteen years, eight months, and one day of reclusion temporal.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the defendants of the crime of abduction with force based on the credibility of the witnesses and the sufficiency of the evidence.

RULING

No, the trial court did not err. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The issue was primarily one of fact and witness credibility. The trial court, having seen and heard the witnesses, found the testimony of the prosecutrix credible and materially corroborated by several witnesses, including the carromata driver and the rescuers. The Court found the defendants’ version of events—involving a spontaneous fight arising from an insult—to be unreasonable and unworthy of belief. Even assuming the defendants’ story was true, it still constituted an unwarranted and unjustifiable attack on a defenseless woman. The evidence established that the defendants, by force and with lewd designs, took the victim from her conveyance to a secluded rice field, surrounding her and making physical advances until her cries brought help. The penalty imposed was appropriate as the law is designed to protect women from such assaults. The judgment of the lower court was affirmed.