People v.

Mahinay
302 SCRA 45 (2000)
G.R. No. 122485. February 1, 1999

Facts: 
Appellant Larry Mahinay worked as a houseboy with Maria Isip, one of his tasks was to take care
of Isip’s house which was under construction adjacent to the latter’s residence. The victim was a 12-
year-old girl who used to frequent the residence of Isip.
 
On the late evening of 25 June 1995, the victim was reported missing by her mother. The
following morning, the Appellant boarded a passenger jeepney and disappeared.
 
The victim’s body was found, lifeless, at around 7:30 am that same day. She was found in the
septic tank wearing her blouse and no underwear. The autopsy showed that the victim was raped and
was strangled to death.
 
Upon re-examining the crime scene, policemen found a pair of dirty white short pants, a brown
belt and a yellow hair ribbon which was identified by the victim’s mother to belong to her daughter.
Also, they found a pair of blue slippers which Isip identified as that of the appellant. Also found in the
yard, three armslength away from the septic tank were an underwear, a leather wallet, a pair of dirty
long pants and a pliers positively identified by Isip as appellant’s belongings.
 
The appellant was soon arrested and executed an extra-judicial confession wherein he narrated
how the crime was committed. The trial ensued and the lower court convicted him of the crime of Rape
and was sentenced to death.
 
The case was forwarded to the Supreme Court for automatic review.
 
Issues:
Whether or not the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution sufficient to prove
his guilt beyond reasonable doubt

Ruling:
Guided by the three principles in the review of rape cases, to wit:
1). An accusation for rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the
person accused, though innocent, to disprove;
2). In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape, where only two persons are usually involved, the
testimony of the complainant is scrutinized with extreme caution; and
3). The evidence of the prosecution stands or falls on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw
strength from the weakness of the defense.

The foregoing circumstantial evidence clearly establishes the felony of rape with homicide defined and
penalized under Section 335 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 11, R.A. 7659, which
provides:

When and how rape is committed Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman under any
of the following circumstances.
1.) By using force or intimidation;
2.) When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and
3.) When the woman is under twelve years of age or is demented.

The crime of rape shall be punished by reclusion perpetua.

Whenever the crime of rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon or by two or more persons,
the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.

When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has become insane, the penalty shall be
death.

When the rape is attempted or frustrated and a homicide is committed by reason or on the occasion
thereof, the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death.

When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, a homicide is committed, the penalty shall be death.

The death penalty shall also be imposed if the crime of rape is committed with any of the following
attendant circumstances:
1.) When the victim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step-
parent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law
spouse of the parent of the victim.
2.) When the victim is under the custody of the police or military authorities.
3.) When the rape is committed in full view of the husband, parent, any of the children or other relatives
within the third degree of consanguinity.
4.) When the victim is a religious or a child below seven (7) years old.
5.) When the offender knows that he is afflicted with Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS)
disease.
6.) When committed by any member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines or Philippine National Police
or any law enforcement agency.
7.) When by reason or on the occasion of the rape, the victim has suffered permanent physical
mutilation.

At the time of the commission of this heinous act, rape was still considered a crime against chastity,
although under the Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (R.A. No. 8353), rape has since been re-classified as a crime
against persons under Articles 266-A and 266-B, and thus, may be prosecuted even without a complaint
filed by the offended party.

The gravamen of the offense of rape, prior to R.A. 8353, is sexual congress with a woman by force and
without consent. (Under the new law, rape may be committed even by a woman and the victim may
even be a man.) If the woman is under 12 years of age, proof of force and consent becomes
immaterial not only because force is not an element of statutory rape, but the absence of a free consent
is presumed when the woman is below such age. Conviction will therefore lie, provided sexual
intercourse is be proven. But if the woman is 12 years of age or over at the time she was violated, as in
this case, not only the first element of sexual intercourse must be proven but also the other element
that the perpetrators evil acts with the offended party was done through force, violence, intimidation or
threat needs to be established. Both elements are present in this case.