G.R. No. L-10819, December 4, 1915
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOSE CLARO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS:
On June 15, 1914, the accused, Jose Claro, was charged with attempted rape. The information alleged that in an unfrequented place, by force and violence, he attempted to have carnal relations with Joaquina Baldos but did not perform all acts constituting the crime due to causes other than his own voluntary desistance. The prosecution’s evidence showed that around 8:00 a.m., while Joaquina Baldos, accompanied by the 12-year-old Cenonica Tredoña, was walking along a trail, they met the accused. After a brief conversation, the accused seized Joaquina, attempted to drag her into nearby bushes, and struck her lightly with his bolo when she resisted. During the struggle, Joaquina fell, grabbed the bolo, but the accused wrested it back, wounding her fingers. He gagged her with a handkerchief and attempted to rape her. Her vigorous resistance, coupled with the arrival of her uncle (who was alerted by Cenonica’s cries), foiled the attempt, and the accused fled. The defense presented an entirely different version, claiming that he and Joaquina were lovers whose relationship was opposed by her parents. He testified that their meeting was a peaceful conversation, that no violence occurred, and that the accusation was fabricated to prevent their marriage. Notably, the incident occurred in a place near houses, including those of Joaquina’s relatives.

ISSUE:
Whether the guilt of the accused for the crime of attempted rape has been proven beyond reasonable doubt, considering the alleged improbability of committing such an offense in a relatively frequented place and in the presence of a companion.

RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of conviction. The Court held that while the circumstances of the crime being committed in a place within calling distance of houses and in the presence of a companion might ordinarily raise doubts, such inferences of improbability must yield to the direct, positive, and credible testimony of witnesses. The Court found no reason to overturn the trial court’s assessment of the witnesses’ credibility, as the testimony of the complainant and her companion was clear, consistent, and untainted by suspicion. Their account was further bolstered by their subsequent conduct and the physical evidence (the wound on Joaquina’s hand). The defense of a fabricated accusation due to parental opposition was uncorroborated and unsupported by the evidence. The case was distinguished from prior acquittals (like U.S. v. Samonte and U.S. v. Mendez) where the evidence for the prosecution was weak or the defense was strongly corroborated. Instead, it was ruled analogous to U.S. v. Estrada, where a conviction for attempted rape was sustained despite the crime occurring in a populated area in broad daylight, based on the strength of the prosecution’s direct evidence. The penalty of four years of presidio correccional, with accessories and costs, was affirmed.