GR L 37673; (October, 1987) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-37673 October 3, 1987
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DOMINADOR GAVARRA Y GARRA, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
The accused, Dominador Gavarra, was charged with Rape with Murder of an eight-year-old girl, Celerina Leyco. The prosecution established that on August 19, 1972, the victim was sent to fetch water and was later found dead. Witness Fe Garcia saw the victim pass by and also saw Gavarra in a nearby coconut tree. The following day, the victim’s body was discovered in a thicket near a clearing cultivated by Gavarra, who had been seen sitting on a stone in the vicinity shortly after the victim went missing. An autopsy revealed multiple deep incised wounds and genital findings, including a slightly congested labia majora. Gavarra later executed an extrajudicial confession admitting he tried to abuse the girl but claimed his penis could not penetrate, after which he hacked her to death.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the crime committed was the complex crime of Rape with Homicide or merely Attempted Rape with Homicide, based on the interpretation of penetration required for rape consummation.
RULING
The Supreme Court ruled that the crime committed was the consummated complex crime of Rape with Homicide, not Attempted Rape with Homicide. The legal logic centers on the definition of rape consummation. The Court clarified that complete or total penetration of the vagina is not necessary. Under settled jurisprudence, the slightest penetration of the female labia, even without emission or hymenal rupture, is sufficient to consummate the crime of rape. Gavarra’s confession that his penis “could not penetrate the vagina” does not equate to mere attempt if there was any entrance within the labia. The medical finding of a “slight reddish appearance of the labia majora” was consistent with contact from an erect penis, proving penetration for legal purposes. Since the killing was a consequence of the rape, the complex crime under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code is present. However, with the abolition of the death penalty, the penalty was reduced to reclusion perpetua. The trial court’s finding of only attempted rape was therefore erroneous.