G.R. No. L-8091; March 6, 1913
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MIGUEL ESTRADA, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The accused, Miguel Estrada, was prosecuted for frustrated rape against Teodorica Jarantilla, a 14-year-old girl. The evidence for the prosecution established that on August 28, 1910, in Bay, Laguna, Teodorica was lured to the house of Juana Geirosa under a pretext. Inside the house, Estrada seized her, attempted to throw her to the floor, lifted her clothes, and threatened to kill her if she did not yield to his desires. She resisted by holding onto a bamboo post and holding her skirts between her legs while crying for help. Her sister, Eulogia, hearing the cries, intervened, causing Estrada to flee. Teodorica’s camisa was torn during the struggle. The defense challenged the prosecution’s evidence, particularly attacking the credibility of the complaint due to an affidavit (Exhibit No. 9) executed by Teodorica’s father, Florentino Jarantilla, before the justice of the peace, asking for dismissal of the case for lack of evidence. Jarantilla claimed this affidavit was obtained by fraud, as he was made to sign it under false pretenses without understanding its Spanish contents. The trial court found the affidavit void due to fraud and convicted Estrada of attempted rape.

ISSUE

Whether the facts proven constitute the crime of attempted rape.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for attempted rape. The Court held that the acts of the accusedseizing the victim, attempting to throw her to the ground, lifting her clothes, and threatening her under circumstances showing a clear purpose to forcibly ravish her, but desisting only upon the arrival of another person attracted by the victim’s screamsconstitute attempted rape under the Penal Code and consistent with the precedent in U.S. vs. Banzon (1 Phil. Rep., 435). The Court rejected the defense’s arguments regarding the unreasonableness of the crime being committed in broad daylight in a populated area, as such unreasonableness is overcome by the direct, positive, and credible testimony of the prosecution witnesses. The Court also sustained the trial court’s finding that Exhibit No. 9 was obtained by fraud and thus without probative value. The judgment of the trial court sentencing Estrada to two years, four months, and one day of prision correccional was affirmed.