TITLE: RENATO BALEROS, JR., petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.

G.R. NO. 138033 DATE: February 22, 2006

PONENTE: GARCIA, J NATURE: Attempted Rape
FACTS:

This case is a petition for review on certiorari. Petitioner Renato Baleros, Jr. assails and seeks the reversal of the
decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) as reiterated in its March 31, 1999 resolution denying petitioner's motion for
reconsideration.

The assailed decision affirmed an earlier decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, in Criminal Case
finding petitioner Renato Baleros, Jr. y David (CHITO) guilty of attempted rape.

The Facts are:

 Petitioner was a medical student in UST at that time when he was accused of attempting to rape Malou
Albano.
 Martina Lourdes Albano (Malou), a medical student of the University of Sto. Tomas stayed at Room 307
with her maid Marvilou.
 December 13, 1991 1:50 am: Renato Baleros, Jr. y David (Chito) forcefully covered the face of Martina
Lourdes T. Albano with a piece of cloth soaked in chemical with dizzying effects. This awakened Malou.
She struggled but could not move and was tightly held and pinned down on the bed by someone. She kicked
him and got her right hand free to squeeze his sex organ causing him to let her go.
 Thereafter Maluo ran away and sought help from its classmates who stays at room 310 of the same floor
and building where the victim lives. She saw her bed in a mess and noticed that her nightdress was stained
with blue. Aside from the window which she had originally left opened, another window inside her bedroom
which leads to Room 306 was now open.
 at the same date around 3:30 pm, Christian and his roommates, Bernard and Lutgardo were asked by the
CIS people to look for anything not belonging to them in their Unit when Rommel Montes went inside and
found a grey bag. Christian knew right away that it belonged to Chito. It contained white t-shirt with fraternity
symbol, a Black Adidas short pants, a handkerchief, 3 white T-shirts, an underwear and socks.
 Several days before such incident, Chito confessed his feelings towards the victim but was rejected by the
latter.
 The security guard of the building, as well as the friends of Albano attested for the prosecution.
 The petitioner himself denied committing the crime imputed to him or making at any time amorous advances
on Malou.
 December 14, 1994, RTC found Renato guilty of attempted rape.
 Aggrieved, petitioner went to the CA where at his appellate recourse. March 31, 1999, CA further affirmed
the decision of the RTC.
 Petitioner moved for reconsideration, but his motion was denied by the CA in its equally assailed resolution
of March 31, 1999.
 Petitioner is now with this Court, on the contention that the CA erred

ISSUE/S:

Whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in affirming RTC Manila’s conviction of Baleros with attempted rape amid
the lack of proof of guilt without reasonable doubt.

1
DOCTRINES | HELD:

Yes. Although the Court does not identify the petitioner to be innocent of the acts imputed to him, such acts were
not substantial enough to convict him of attempted rape. For one, Baleros was not identified through direct evidence
but only from circumstantial identification (that is, from the congruence of Maluo identification of what the perpetrator
wore and the witnesses’ testimonies as to what Baleros wore that night).

Article 335 in relation to Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code states the circumstances that shows overt acts of a
perpetrator in committing the crime of rape. Moreover, the Court has ruled in Perez v. CA that in order for a crime
of rape to have been committed in an attempted stage, the accused must have commenced the act of penetrating
the woman’s vagina with his sex organ but was not able to completely due to some reason or accident other than
his own spontaneous desistance.

As it were, petitioner did not commence at all the performance of any act indicative of an intent or attempt to rape
Malou. It cannot be overemphasized that petitioner was fully clothed and that there was no attempt on his part to
undress Malou, let alone touch her private part. Thus, the court held that the petitioner is not guilty of attempted
rape.

While the series of acts committed by the petitioner do not determine attempted rape, they constitute unjust vexation
punishable as light coercion under the second paragraph of Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code. Unjust vexation
exists even without the element of restraint or compulsion for the reason that this term is broad enough to include
any human conduct which, although not productive of some physical or material harm, would unjustly annoy or
irritate an innocent person. The paramount question is whether the offender's act causes annoyance, irritation,
torment, distress or disturbance to the mind of the person to whom it is directed. Malou, after the incident in question,
cried while relating to her classmates what she perceived to be a sexual attack and the fact that she filed a case
for attempted rape proved beyond cavil that she was disturbed, if not distressed by the acts of petitioner

RULING:

Wherefore, the assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals arming that of the Regional Trial Court of Manila, is hereby
REVERSED and SET ASIDE and a new one entered ACQUITTING petitioner Renato D. Baleros, Jr. of the charge
for attempted rape. Petitioner, however, is adjudged GUILTY of light coercion and is accordingly sentenced to 30
days of arresto menor and to pay a ne of P200.00, with the accessory penalties thereof and to pay the costs.

NOTES:
Positive identification -- pertains essentially to proof of identity and not per se to that of being an eyewitness to
the very act of commission of the crime. There are two types of positive identification.
 Direct evidence - where witness may identify a suspect or accused as the offender as an
eyewitness to the very act of the commission of the crime.
 Circumstantial evidence - instances where, although a witness may not have actually witnessed
the very act of commission of a crime, he may still be able to positively identify a suspect or accused
as the perpetrator of a crime as when, for instance, the latter is the person or one of the persons last
seen with the victim immediately before and right after the commission of the crime.

Under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, rape is committed by a man who has carnal knowledge or
intercourse with a woman under any of the following circumstances: (1) By using force or intimidation; (2) When
2
the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) When the woman is under twelve years of age
or is demented. Under Article 6, in relation to the aforementioned article of the same code, rape is attempted when
the offender commences the commission of rape directly by overt acts and does not perform all the acts of execution
which should produce the crime of rape by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
desistance.