FACTS:

Ceilito Orita alias Lito was charged with the crime of rape, specifically for the act of having sexual intercourse with the complainant, Cristina Abayan, against her will and without her consent. The incident allegedly took place inside a boarding house in Borongan, Eastern Samar. The accused supposedly used a Batangas knife and had lewd designs during the commission of the crime. The trial court, finding the accused guilty of frustrated rape, sentenced him to imprisonment and ordered him to pay damages.

On appeal, the Court of Appeals modified the judgment, finding the accused guilty of rape and imposing a higher penalty of reclusion perpetua. The case was then elevated to the Supreme Court for review.

During the trial, the victim, Cristina Abayan, testified in detail about the rape, including the accused's use of a Batangas knife. Her testimony was supported by the testimony of a police officer who accompanied her to the hospital for examination. The resident physician who conducted the examination issued a medical certificate which indicated physical injuries consistent with a struggle.

The accused claimed that there were inconsistencies in the testimonies of the witnesses, questioning their credibility. However, the trial court found the testimonies of the victim and the police officer to be sincere and credible.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the accused is guilty of rape.

2. Whether the accused should be convicted of frustrated rape.

3. Whether or not the frustrated stage applies to the crime of rape.

4. Whether or not the existence of penetration is necessary for the consummation of rape.

5. Whether there is a variance between the testimony of the victim and the medical certificate.

6. Whether the accused may be convicted based solely on the victim's testimony.

RULING:

1. The accused is guilty of rape. The victim's clear and uncontradicted testimony, supported by the corroboration of evidence such as medical findings and the inspection of the scene of the incident, establishes the commission of rape beyond reasonable doubt.

2. The conviction for frustrated rape is not proper. There is no crime of frustrated rape under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. Rape is classified as a consummated felony, and thus, the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment must all be present for a conviction of rape. Since the acts committed by the accused clearly establish the commission of rape, the proper conviction should be for the consummated offense of rape.

3. The frustrated stage does not apply to the crime of rape. The essential element that distinguishes attempted from frustrated felony is the intervention of a foreign or extraneous cause or agency between the beginning of the commission of the crime and the moment when all the acts have been performed which should result in the consummated crime. In rape, once the offender has carnal knowledge of the victim, he attains his purpose and all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished. Therefore, the felony is consummated and the frustrated stage does not apply.

4. The existence of penetration is not necessary for the consummation of rape. According to jurisprudence, any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient to warrant conviction for rape. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ, without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina, is enough. Therefore, rape can still be consummated even without conclusive evidence of penetration.

5. The alleged variance between the testimony of the victim and the medical certificate does not exist. The medical certificate stated that the vulva was erythematous and tender, which indicates inflammation. Although the doctor testified that there was uncertainty whether or not there was penetration, the victim positively testified that there was partial penetration. Therefore, there is no variance between the testimony and the medical certificate.

6. In a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted even on the sole basis of the victim's credible testimony. The medical certificate is merely corroborative and not an indispensable element in the prosecution of the case.

PRINCIPLES:

• When a woman testifies that she has been raped and her testimony is clear and free from contradiction, it is sufficient to show that rape was committed.

• Medical findings and the inspection of the scene of the incident can corroborate the victim's testimony in rape cases.

• In judging rape complaints, a little insight into human nature is of utmost value.

• The prosecution has the discretion to determine who should be presented as witnesses based on their own assessment of their necessity.

• There is no crime of frustrated rape under the Revised Penal Code. Rape is classified as a consummated felony, and all the elements necessary for its execution must be present for a conviction of rape.

• Attempted and frustrated felonies require the intervention of a foreign or extraneous cause or agency that prevents the offender from performing all the acts necessary to produce the completed crime.

• In rape, once the offender has carnal knowledge of the victim, the felony is consummated and the frustrated stage does not apply.

• Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient for the consummation of rape. Conclusive evidence of penetration is not necessary.

• In cases of rape, the testimony of the victim and the medical certificate should complement each other. However, if there is a variance, reliance can still be placed on the victim's credible testimony. (People v. Tabago, People v. Aragona, People v. Taduyo)

• The presence of a medical certificate is not an indispensable element in the prosecution of a rape case. The victim's credible testimony can be sufficient to secure a conviction. (People v. Alfonso)

• In a prosecution for rape, the testimony of the victim must be credible to support a conviction.