FIRST DIVISION
G.R. No. 166441, October 08, 2014
NORBERTO CRUZ Y BARTOLOME, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
DECISION
BERSAMIN, J.:
The intent of the offender to lie with the female defines the distinction between
attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness. The felony of attempted rape requires such
intent; the felony of acts of lasciviousness does not. Only the direct overt acts of the
offender establish the intent to lie with the female. However, merely climbing on top of
a naked female does not constitute attempted rape without proof of his erectile penis
being in a position to penetrate the female's vagina.
The Case
This appeal examines the decision promulgated on July 26, 2004,1 whereby the Court of
Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction for attempted rape of the petitioner by the
Regional Trial Court, Branch 34, in Balaoan, La Union (RTC), and imposing on him the
indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of four (4) years and two (2) months of prision
correccional, as minimum, to ten (10) years of prision mayor, as maximum, and
ordering him to pay moral damages of P20,000.00 to AAA,2 the victim.
Antecedents
The petitioner was charged in the RTC with attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness
involving different victims. At arraignment, he pleaded not guilty to the respective
informations, to wit:
ChanRoblesVirt ualawli bra ry
Criminal Case No. 2388
Attempted Rape
That on or about the 21st day of December 1993, at about 2:00 o'clock in the morning,
along the Bangar-Luna Road, Barangay Central West No. 2, Municipality of Bangar,
Province of La Union, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court,
said accused, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously and by means of
force and intimidation commenced the commission of rape directly by overt acts, to wit:
While private complainant AAA, an unmarried woman, fifteen (15) years old, was
sleeping inside the tent along Bangar-Luna Road, the said accused remove her panty
and underwear and lay on top of said AAA embracing and touching her vagina and
breast with intent of having carnal knowledge of her by means of force, and if the
accused did not accomplish his purpose that is to have carnal knowledge of the said
AAA it was not because of his voluntary desistance but because the said offended party
succeeded in resisting the criminal attempt of said accused to the damage and
prejudice of said offended party.