People v. Reyes
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The accused, Eliseo Reyes, was charged with the abduction of Apolonia Enriquez, a 17-year-old virgin, with unchaste designs and her consent, on or about October 10, 1913, in the City of Manila. The evidence showed that Reyes maintained amorous relations with Enriquez for six months prior to the incident, despite being married, a fact unknown to the girl. On October 10, 1913, Enriquez left her parents' house and went to another house, where Reyes joined her. They stayed together in several houses, during which time they repeatedly had carnal intercourse. The defense attempted to prove that the girl left voluntarily due to fear of her parents and that she knew Reyes was married and went with him for care. However, letters presented by the defense indicated the girl was dominated by passion and acted in obedience to a prior agreement. Reyes also made statements and presented documents suggesting he would marry the girl or provide for her, which were later revealed to be deceptions as he was married. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Manila found the defendant guilty of abduction with consent and sentenced him to one year, eight months, and twenty-one days of prision correccional, to endow the offended party P250, to maintain any offspring, suffer subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and pay costs. The defendant appealed this judgment. The Petition: The sole issue raised by the defendant's counsel on appeal was whether Apolonia Enriquez was seduced or induced by the defendant to leave her parents' house, which is an indispensable requisite for the crime of abduction with consent under Article 446 of the Penal Code.
Issue(s)
Whether Apolonia Enriquez was seduced or induced by the defendant to leave her parents' house, which is an indispensable requisite for the crime of abduction with consent under Article 446 of the Penal Code. Whether the facts presented constitute the crime of abduction with consent as defined under Article 446 of the Penal Code.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the Court of First Instance, with a modification to include the accessory penalties of suspension of the right to hold public office and the right of suffrage. The Court found the defendant guilty of abduction with consent and ordered him to pay the civil liabilities as adjudged.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of whether Apolonia Enriquez was seduced or induced by the defendant to leave her parents' house: The Court held that the evidence clearly showed inducement and seduction. Despite the defendant's claim that the girl called him and informed him she was outside, this did not negate prior inducement. The fact that they stayed together for several days in different houses, engaging in repeated carnal intercourse, demonstrated a prior agreement and the consummation of the crime. The Court emphasized that the defendant, being a married man, deceived the girl and entertained unchaste designs from the beginning, using her passion to accomplish his ends. The letters presented by the defense, instead of helping the accused, proved that the girl was subjugated by passion and acted in obedience to a prior agreement, confirming the inducement. On the issue of whether the facts constitute the crime of abduction with consent: The Court reiterated its ruling in United States vs. Reyes (20 Phil. Rep., 510) that for abduction with consent, it is not necessary for the abducted woman to be physically removed from her parents' house. It is sufficient that she leaves and withdraws herself from their control and vigilance, yielding to the cajolery and promises of her seducer. The law punishes the disgrace to the family and the alarm caused by the disappearance, not the violence against the abducted person, as consent is assumed. The place of abduction is immaterial. In this case, the defendant induced Apolonia Enriquez, a 17-year-old maiden, to leave her parents' home, maintained amorous relations with her for six months, gained her consent through seduction, and subsequently had carnal intercourse with her. These facts clearly constitute the crime of abduction with consent under Article 446 of the Penal Code, as amended by Act No. 2298.
Main Doctrine
The crime of abduction with consent under Article 446 of the Penal Code is committed when a person induces a minor, who is a virgin, to leave her parents' home and withdraws her from their control and vigilance, subsequently having carnal intercourse with her. The physical removal from the house is not essential; withdrawal from parental control through seduction or cajolery suffices. The law punishes the disgrace to the family and the alarm caused by the disappearance, not the violence against the abducted person, as consent is presumed.