POLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES

COLLEGE OF LAW

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
SECOND SEMESTER AY 2023 - 2024

CASE DIGEST

TITLE OF THE CASE: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. MARCIANO

SAPURCO ALIAS “CIANO,” ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
GR # AND DATE: G.R. No. 107748. July 03, 1995
PONENTE: BELLOSILLO

CASE DOCTRINE According to par. 2 of Art. 342, if the abducted girl is below twelve years
of age it is unnecessary that it be done against her will provided that the
taking be attended with lewd intentions. The reason behind the law rests on
the assumption that a girl of such tender age is assumed to have no will of her
own to consciously consent to the abduction.

FACTS The complainant Melinda Malong was an 11-year-old girl from Magsaysay,
Capalonga, Camarines Norte who on January 16, 1991 was abducted form
their home by the accused-appellant, Marciano Sapurco who himself was a
guest in the house of the complainant’s parents.

The accused-appellant, grabbed the complainant and under threat of

death, instructed the latter not to shout. He then took the complainant to a
deserted nipa hut where he placed himself on top of her and had sexual
intercourse with her. She was unable to resist her assailant as he was holding a
bladed weapon at the time. At the crack of dawn, the accused-appellant
then took the complainant to Daet where they both proceeded to a watch
repair shop owned by a friend of the accused-appellant. The complainant
was instructed to stay in said repair shop and await the accused-appellant’s
return.

Upon returning to the shop, he instructed her to dress up as they were going
to Manila, however, before they could leave the accused-appellant was
arrested by policemen.

On 17 January 1991 Dr. Pauline Kollin examined Melinda at the Camarines

Norte Provincial Hospital and reported that her nulliparous outlet had
lacerations at the 3 o'clock and 6 o'clock positions confirming that her vagina
had been previously penetrated.

The accused-appellant offers a different version of events where he claims

that the complainant approached him and begged him to take her with him
to Daet as she plans to run a way from home. He claims that he knows how
 strict her mother is, having been a guest to their house during harvest season
for several years and having witnessed the complainant being whipped by
her mother on one occasion.

ISSUE/S:
Whether the accused-appellant forcibly abducted and raped the
complainant.

RULING: Yes. The Court held that clearly, accused appellant violated Art. 342 of The
Revised Penal Code because the complaining witness was under twelve
years of age when he took her away with lewd designs. According to par.
2 of Art. 342, if the abducted girl is below twelve years of age it is
unnecessary that it be done against her will, provided that the taking be
attended with lewd intentions. The reason behind the law rests on the
assumption that a girl of such tender age is assumed to have no will of her
own to consciously consent to the abduction.

Furthermore, the Court held when the issue of credibility of witnesses is

being resolved appellate courts will generally not disturb the factual
findings of trial courts. The credibility of witnesses is a question better
assessed by the trial court having observed their demeanor and
deportment during trial. Findings of trial courts regarding the veracity of a
testimony are given great weight and accorded high respect by this Court
in the absence of a showing that they were reached arbitrarily.

WHEREFORE, the judgment of the court a quo finding accused-appellant

MARCIANO SAPURCO guilty of the complex crime of forcible abduction
with rape and imposing upon him a prison term of reclusion perpetua,
ordering him to indemnify the complaining witness MELINDA MALONG in
the amount of P50,000.00 and to pay the costs, is AFFIRMED.