4.

A. Yes, The charge of rape through forcible abduction is correct

Under the Revised Penal Code, It is accepted law that, even if the victim was coerced into submission,
rape constitutes the primary intent of the accused. Forced kidnapping is absorbed. As forced abduction
is a necessary component of committing rape, the doctrine of absorption rather than Article 48 of the
RPC is relevant.

Therefore, Solito kidnapped Maita. one evening. Maita was coerced into a Toyota lnnova by Solito and
his accomplices, who then took her to a green-painted home in a barren area of the town. There,
despite Maita's will, Solito was able to have carnal knowledge of her.

Hence, Solito is liable for Forcible abduction.

B. Yes, the ruling of both courts are correct.

In a decision by the supreme court held, Objects of lawful commerce confiscated in the course of an
enforcement of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act that are the property of a third person are
subject to be returned to the lawful owner who is not liable for the unlawful act. But the trial court may
not release such objects pending trial and before judgment.

Therefore, RTC, Branch 8 correctly ruled the release of the vehicle. The crime of rape was already
terminated leading to the conviction of Solito. Further, the confiscation or retention of the said vehicle
has no more purpose even on appeal. the Order of denial of release of the Motor Vehicle by RTC, Branch
29 was also correct.

Hence, the decision of RTC Branch 8 and 29 are both correct.

5. WON the crimes charge with Mr. Gulang are proper

No, the charges to Mr. Gulang are improper.

Under the Revised Penal Code, Malversation of public funds or property. This what we called
Presumption of malversation.

Therefore, State must prove the following essential elements, The accused is a public officer discharging
administrative, judicial or official functions, He must have acted with manifest partiality, evident bad
faith, or gross inexcusable negligence in the discharge of his functions and His action caused any undue
injury to any party, including the Government, or gave any private party unwarranted benefits,
advantage or preference in the discharge of his functions.

Hence, Mr. Gulang's charges are dismissed.

6.

a. To be held accountable for an attempted carnal rape with knowledge, the accused person's penis
contact the victim's pudendum and labia,however, his deeds must be done with clarity. the desire to
engage in sexual activity.
B. The crime committed is Estafa through Falsification of Public Documents. A capataz is a foreman for
the government and since the falsification of the public document is committed as a means to commit
estafa, the proper charge is estafa through falsification of public documents.

C. Section 6 of Republic Act No. 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006), Minimum Age of
Criminal Responsibility. - A child fifteen (15) years of age or under at the time of the commission of the
offense shall be exempt from criminal liability. However, the child shall be subjected to an intervention
program pursuant to Section 20 of this Act.