lasanas.vs.people.2014

8/19/2019 Lasanas.vs.People.2014

1/9

Today is Tuesday, December 15, 2015

Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT

Manila

FIRT DI!II"#

R. No. 159031 June 23, 2014

EL A. LASANAS, Petitioner,

OPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent%

D & ' I I " #

RSAMIN, J.:

y person )ho contracts a second marria*e )ithout first ha$in* a +udicial declaration of the nullity of his or her first marriaeit on its face $oid and in eistent for lac- of a marria*e license, is *uilty of bi*amy as defined and penali.ed by (rticle /Re$ised Penal 'ode%

The 'ase

e accused see-s the re$ersal of the decision promul*ated on (u*ust 2, 2002,1 )hereby the 'ourt of (ppeals '(3 affirmcon$iction for bi*amy under the +ud*ment rendered on "ctober /0, 2000 in 'riminal 'ase #o% 404 by the Re*ional Turt RT'3, ranch /4, in Iloilo 'ity%

(ntecedents

February 16, 164,2 7ud*e 'arlos % ala.ar of the Municipal Trial 'ourt of an Mi*uel, Iloilo solemni.ed the marria*e used #oel 8asanas and ocorro Patin*o / )ithout the benefit of a marria*e license% The records sho) that 8asanas andin*o had not eecuted any affida$it of cohabitation to ecuse the lac- of the marria*e license% 5 "n (u*ust 29, 140, 8as

Patin*o reaffirmed their marria*e $o)s in a reli*ious ceremony before Fr% Rodolfo Tamayo at the an 7ose 'hurch in Iy%6 They submitted no marria*e license or affida$it of cohabitation for that purpose%9 oth ceremonies )ere e$idenced byrespondin* marria*e certificates%4 In 142, 8asanas and Patin*o separated de facto because of irreconcilable difference

December 29, 1/, the accused contracted marria*e )ith 7osefa &slaban in a reli*ious ceremony solemni.ed by Fr% R:uito at the ta% Maria 'hurch in Iloilo 'ity% Their marria*e certificate reflected the ci$il status of the accused as sin*le% 10

7uly 26, 16, the accused filed a complaint for annulment of marria*e and dama*es a*ainst ocorro in the RT' in Iloiy,11 )hich )as doc-eted as 'i$il 'ase #o% 2/1// and raffled to ranch / of the RT'% The complaint alle*ed that ocorr

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt1


2/9

ployed deceit, misrepresentations and fraud in securin* his consent to their marria*e; and that subse:uent marital breaccholo*ical incompatibilities and her infidelity had caused him to suffer mental an*uish, sleepless ni*hts and social humirantin* the a)ard of dama*es% In support of his complaint, he further alle*ed, amon* others, that<

)as married to the defendant on February 16, 164 )hich marria*e )as officiated by =on% 'arlos % ala.ar, Municipa

*e of an Mi*uel, Iloilo% Machine copy of the Marria*e 'ontract is here)ith attached as &hibit >(> and made part hereoch marria*e )as ratified by a )eddin* at an 7ose 'hurch, Iloilo 'ity on (u*ust 29, 140 and re*istered at the office ofy Re*istrar% Machine copy of the Marria*e 'ontract is here)ith attached as (nne >>;

ntiff and defendant ha$e no children and ha$e no properties ecept some personal belon*in*s;

ntiff met the defendant sometime in the middle of 169 at the house of Mr% Raul 8% 'ataloctocan in ur*os treet, 8apao 'ity )herein the purpose of their meetin* )as for the plaintiff to consult and see- treatment by the defendant becauseer )as a >babaylan>< Plaintiff )as treated by the defendant and the subse:uent treatments )ere performed by the defener residence in aran*ay, an*a, Mina, Iloilo, the treatment made bein* on a continuin* basis;

February 16, 164, defendant as-ed the plaintiff to come )ith her to Iloilo 'ity% They )ent to Dainty Restaurant at 7%M% eet% Plaintiff sa) se$eral persons therein% (fter eatin* plaintiff )as made to si*n the marria*e contract, )hich )as null anac- of marria*e license and based on a false affida$it of cohabitation% (fter their marria*e, they )ent home to aran*ay

n*ac, Mina, Iloilo, )hich mar-ed the start of a married life roc-ed )ith marital differences, :uarrels and incompatibilities,hout lo$e, but under the uncontrollable fear of harm that should befall him should he not follo) her;

in* the period the parties are li$in* to*ether defendant )ould na* the plaintiff, fabricate stories a*ainst him and displayef +ealousy, ne*lect her marital obli*ations e$en committed infidelity, )hich psycholo*ical incompatibilities and marital bree forced the petitioner to li$e separately from defendant since 142 up to the present%12

"ctober 14, ocorro char*ed the accused )ith bi*amy in the "ffice of the 'ity Prosecutor of Iloilo 'ity%1/ (fter dueceedin*s, the accused )as formally indicted for bi*amy under the information filed on "ctober 20, 14 in the RT', $i.<

at on or about the 29th day of December, 1/ in the 'ity of Iloilo, Philippines and )ithin the +urisdiction of this 'ourt, saused, #oel 8asanas bein* pre$iously united in a la)ful marria*e )ith ocorro Patin*o and )ithout the said marria*e han le*ally dissol$e sic3 or annulled, did then and there )illfully, unla)fully and feloniously contract a second or subse:uerria*e )ith 7osefa &slaban%

#TR(R? T" 8(@%1

e criminal case, doc-eted as 'riminal 'ase #o% 404, )as raffled to ranch /4 of the RT' in Iloilo 'ity% The accused p

*uilty at his arrai*nment,15

and trial ensued in due course%

he mean)hile, on #o$ember 2, 14, the RT' ranch /3 rendered its +ud*ment in 'i$il 'ase #o% 2/1// dismissin* tusedAs complaint for annulment of marria*e, and declarin* the marria*e bet)een him and ocorro $alid and le*al, as fo

&R&F"R&, premises considered, +ud*ment is hereby rendered dismissin* the complaint filed by the plaintiff #oel (ren*anas a*ainst the defendant, ocorro Patin*o, considerin* that the marria*e bet)een them is $alid and le*al%

e plaintiff #oel 8asanas is hereby ordered to *i$e monthly support to his )ife, the defendant in this case, Ma% ocorro Pa

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt15


3/9

he amount of P/,000%00 a month, from the time that she filed her ans)er )ith counterclaim on February /, 19, pursuacle 20/ of the Family 'ode and e$ery month thereafter% 'osts a*ainst the plaintiff%

"RD&R&D%16

e accused appealed to the '(%19

Rulin* of the RT'

"ctober /0, 2000, the RT' ranch /43 rendered its assailed decision in 'riminal 'ase #o% 404, disposin* thusly<

&R&F"R&, findin* accused #"&8 8((#( *uilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of IB(M? punishable un/ of the Re$ised Penal 'ode, +ud*ment is hereby entered orderin* him to ser$e an indeterminate penalty of imprison

)o 23 years and four 3 months of prision correccional, as minimum, to ei*ht 43 years and one 13 day of prision mayoimum%

e accused is entitled to the pri$ile*es etended to him under (rt% 2 of the Re$ised Penal 'ode%

"RD&R&D%14

cision of the '( (**rie$ed, the accused appealed his con$iction to the '(, insistin* that the RT' thereby erred in findinhad le*ally married ocorro despite the absence of the marria*e license, affida$it of cohabitation and affida$it of theemni.in* officer%

e accused contended that because he had not been le*ally married to ocorro, the first element of bi*amy )as notablished; that his *ood faith and the absence of criminal intent )ere absolutory in his fa$or; and that he had been of theest belief that there )as no need for a +udicial declaration of the nullity of the first marria*e before he could contract ase:uent marria*e%1

(u*ust 2, 2002, ho)e$er, the '( promul*ated its challen*ed decision, decreein*< @=&R&F"R&, for lac- of merit, theMI& the appeal and (FFIRM the appealed Decision%

"RD&R&D%20

Issues

nce, the accused has appealed by petition for re$ie) on certiorari% 21 =e ar*ues that the RT' and the '( incorrectly appli$isions of (rticle / of the Re$ised Penal 'ode, 22 assertin* that the ci$il la) rule embodied in (rticle 0 of the Family 'uirin* a +udicial declaration of nullity before one could contract a subse:uent marria*e should not apply in this purely crisecution;2/ that e$en if (rticle 0 of the Family 'ode )as applicable, he should still be ac:uitted because his subse:uenrria*e )as null and $oid for bein* )ithout a recorded +ud*ment of nullity of marria*e, as pro$ided in (rticle 5/ in relation

cle 52 of the Family 'ode;2 that, conse:uently, an essential element of the crime of bi*amy, i%e% that the subse:uent ma$alid, )as lac-in*;25 and that his *ood faith and lac- of criminal intent )ere sufficient to relie$e him of criminal liability%26

Rulin*

e appeal lac-s merit%

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt26http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt26


4/9

e la) on bi*amy is found in (rticle / of the Re$ised Penal 'ode, )hich pro$ides<

cle /% i*amy% C The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person )ho shall contract a second orse:uent marria*e before the former marria*e has been le*ally dissol$ed, or before the absent spouse has been declaresumpti$ely dead by means of a +ud*ment rendered in the proper proceedin*s%

e elements of the crime of bi*amy are as follo)s< 13 that the offender has been le*ally married; 23 that the marria*e han le*ally dissol$ed or, in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead accordin'i$il 'ode; /3 that he or she contracts a second or subse:uent marria*e; and 3 that the second or subse:uent marriaall the essential re:uisites for $alidity%29

e '( specifically obser$ed<

s 'ourt concedes that the marria*e bet)een accusedappellant 8asanas and pri$ate complainant Patin*o )as $oid beche absence of a marria*e license or of an affida$it of cohabitation% The ratificatory reli*ious )eddin* ceremony could nodated the $oid marria*e% #either can the church )eddin* be treated as a marria*e in itself for to do so, all the essential

mal re:uisites of a $alid marria*e should be present% "ne of these re:uisites is a $alid marria*e license ecept in those

ances )hen this re:uirement may be ecused% There ha$in* been no marria*e license nor affida$it of cohabitation preshe priest )ho presided o$er the reli*ious rites, the reli*ious )eddin* cannot be treated as a $alid marria*e in itself%

then, as the la) and +urisprudence say, petitioner should ha$e first secured a +udicial declaration of the nullity of his $oidrria*e to pri$ate complainant Patin*o before marryin* 7osefa &slaban% (ctually, he did +ust that but after his marria*e to aban% 'onse:uently, he $iolated the la) on bi*amy%

cusedAs reliance on the cases of People $% Mendo.a, 5 Phil% 45 and People $% (ra*on, 100 Phil% 10// is misplaced becrulin* in these cases ha$e already been abandoned per Relo$a $% 8andico, supra, and @ie*el $% empioDiy, 1/ 'R(

e petitioner also cited ?ap $% 'ourt of (ppeals, 15 'R( 22 )hich resurrected the (ra*on and Mendo.a doctrine but ?n* too had been o$erta-en by (rt% 0 of the Family 'ode and by Domin*o $% 'ourt of (ppeals and Te $% 'ourt of (ppealra%

*ardin* accusedappellantAs defense of *ood faith, the same is una$ailin* pursuant to MaEo.ca $% Doma*as, 24 'R(

s 'ourt, therefore concludes that the appealed Decision is correct in all respect%24

Decision of the '(

*rie$ed, the accused appealed his con$iction to the '(, insistin* that the RT' thereby erred in findin* that he had le*allrried ocorro despite the absence of the marria*e license, affida$it of cohabitation and affida$it of the solemni.in* office

e accused contended that because he had not been le*ally married to ocorro, the first element of bi*amy )as notablished; that his *ood faith and the absence of criminal intent )ere absolutory in his fa$or; and that he had been of the

est belief that there )as no need for a +udicial declaration of the nullity of the first marria*e before he could contract ase:uent marria*e%1

(u*ust 2, 2002, ho)e$er, the '( promul*ated its challen*ed decision, decreein*< @=&R&F"R&, for lac- of merit, theMI& the appeal and (FFIRM the appealed Decision%

"RD&R&D%20

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt20


5/9

Issues

nce, the accused has appealed by petition for re$ie) on certiorari% 21 =e ar*ues that the RT' and the '( incorrectly appli$isions of (rticle / of the Re$ised Penal 'ode, 22 assertin* that the ci$il la) rule embodied in (rticle 0 of the Family 'uirin* a +udicial declaration of nullity before one could contract a subse:uent marria*e should not apply in this purely cri

secution;2/ that e$en if (rticle 0 of the Family 'ode )as applicable, he should still be ac:uitted because his subse:uenrria*e )as null and $oid for bein* )ithout a recorded +ud*ment of nullity of marria*e, as pro$ided in (rticle 5/ in relationcle 52 of the Family 'ode;2 that, conse:uently, an essential element of the crime of bi*amy, i%e% that the subse:uent ma$alid, )as lac-in*;25 and that his *ood faith and lac- of criminal intent )ere sufficient to relie$e him of criminal liability%26

Rulin*

e appeal lac-s merit%

e la) on bi*amy is found in (rticle / of the Re$ised Penal 'ode, )hich pro$ides<

cle /% i*amy% C The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person )ho shall contract a second or

se:uent marria*e before the former marria*e has been le*ally dissol$ed, or before the absent spouse has been declaresumpti$ely dead by means of a +ud*ment rendered in the proper proceedin*s%

e elements of the crime of bi*amy are as follo)s< 13 that the offender has been le*ally married; 23 that the marria*e han le*ally dissol$ed or, in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead accordin'i$il 'ode; /3 that he or she contracts a second or subse:uent marria*e; and 3 that the second or subse:uent marriaall the essential re:uisites for $alidity%29

e '( specifically obser$ed<

s 'ourt concedes that the marria*e bet)een accusedappellant 8asanas and pri$ate complainant Patin*o )as $oid beche absence of a marria*e license or of an affida$it of cohabitation% The ratificatory reli*ious )eddin* ceremony could no

dated the $oid marria*e% #either can the church )eddin* be treated as a marria*e in itself for to do so, all the essential mal re:uisites of a $alid marria*e should be present% "ne of these re:uisites is a $alid marria*e license ecept in thoseances )hen this re:uirement may be ecused% There ha$in* been no marria*e license nor affida$it of cohabitation preshe priest )ho presided o$er the reli*ious rites, the reli*ious )eddin* cannot be treated as a $alid marria*e in itself%

then, as the la) and +urisprudence say, petitioner should ha$e first secured a +udicial declaration of the nullity of his $oidrria*e to pri$ate complainant Patin*o before marryin* 7osefa &slaban% (ctually, he did +ust that but after his marria*e to aban% 'onse:uently, he $iolated the la) on bi*amy%

cusedAs reliance on the cases of People $% Mendo.a, 5 Phil% 45 and People $% (ra*on, 100 Phil% 10// is misplaced becrulin* in these cases ha$e already been abandoned per Relo$a $% 8andico, supra, and @ie*el $% empioDiy, 1/ 'R(

e petitioner also cited ?ap $% 'ourt of (ppeals, 15 'R( 22 )hich resurrected the (ra*on and Mendo.a doctrine but ?

n* too had been o$erta-en by (rt% 0 of the Family 'ode and by Domin*o $% 'ourt of (ppeals and Te $% 'ourt of (ppealra%

*ardin* accusedappellantAs defense of *ood faith, the same is una$ailin* pursuant to MaEo.ca $% Doma*as, 24 'R(

s 'ourt, therefore concludes that the appealed Decision is correct in all respect%24

sed on the findin*s of the '(, this case has all the fore*oin* elements attendant%

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt26http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt26http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#fnt28


6/9

e first and second elements of bi*amy )ere present in $ie) of the absence of a +udicial declaration of nullity of marria*e)een the accused and ocorro% The re:uirement of securin* a +udicial declaration of nullity of marria*e prior to contractse:uent marria*e is found in (rticle 0 of the Family 'ode, to )it<

cle 0% The absolute nullity of a pre$ious marria*e may be in$o-ed for purposes of remarria*e on the basis solely of a fi

*ment declarin* such pre$ious marria*e $oid% n3

e reason for the pro$ision )as aptly discussed in Te$es $% People


7/9

anch /3 dismissed his complaint for annulment of marria*e after the information for bi*amy had already been filed a*ai, thus confirmin* the $alidity of his marria*e to ocorro% 'onsiderin* that the accusedAs subse:uent marria*e to 7osefa undisputed fact, the third element of bi*amy )as established% #onetheless, he submits that his marria*e to 7osefa )as ause of lac- of a recorded +ud*ment of nullity of marria*e% uch ar*ument had no )orth, ho)e$er, because it )as he hi

o failed to secure a +udicial declaration of nullity of his pre$ious marria*e prior to contractin* his subse:uent marria*e% In

ebro $% 'ourt of (ppeals,/2 the 'ourt has eplained that >sGince a marria*e contracted durin* the subsistence of a $alidrria*e is automatically $oid, the nullity of this second marria*e is not per se an ar*ument for the a$oidance of criminal liabi*amy%

( plain readin* of (rticle / of the Re$ised Penal 'odeG, therefore, )ould indicate that the pro$ision penali.es the mof contractin* a second or subse:uent marria*e durin* the subsistence of a $alid marria*e%>//

e 'ourt has further obser$ed in #ollora, 7r% $% People


8/9

' & R T I F I ' ( T I " #

suant to ection 1/, (rticle !III of the 'onstitution, I certify that the conclusions in the abo$e Decision had been reachesultation before the case )as assi*ned to the )riter of the opinion of the 'ourtHs Di$ision%

RIA LOUR!ES P. A. SERENO

ef 7ustice

o%no%e&

1 Rollo, pp% 192; penned by (ssociate 7ustice =ilarion 8% (:uino retired3, )ith (ssociate 7ustice &d*ardo 'ru. retired3 and (ssociate 7ustice Re*alado &% Maambon* retiredJdeceased3 concurrirt*%

2 Records, p% 6%

/ Id% at 19%

Rollo, p% 20%

5 Id%

6 Records, p% 14%

9 Rollo, p% 21%

4 Records, pp% 1914, 200, 205%

Rollo, p% 21%

10 Records, p% 1%

11 Id% at 612%

12 Id% at 6%

1/ Rollo, p% 21%

1 Records, p% 1%

15 Id% at /4%

16 Id% at 2/52/6%

19 Id% at 5/%

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt17http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt1http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt2http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt3http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt4http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt5http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt6http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt7http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt8http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt9http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt10http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt11http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt12http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt13http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt14http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt15http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt16http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt17


9/9

14 Id% at 55%

1 Rollo, pp% 222/%

20 Id% at 2%

21 Id% at 416%

22 Id% at 10%

2/ Id% at 1112%

2 Id% at 1/%

25 Id%

26

Id% at 1%

29 Tenebro $% 'ourt of (ppeals, B%R% #o% 150954, February 14, 200, 2/ 'R( 292, 29, citin* Reyes, 8%Re$ised Penal 'ode, oo- II, 1th &d%, 14, p% 09%

24 Rollo, pp% 2/2%

2 B%R% #o% 144995, (u*ust 2, 2011, 656 'R( /09, /1//1%

/0 ee 7arillo $% People, B%R% #o% 16/5, eptember 2, 200, 601 'R( 2/6, 26%

/1 B%R% #o% 11566, 7uly 19, 201/, 901 'R( 506, 515%

/2 upra note 29%

// Id% at 242%

/ B%R% #o% 1125, eptember 9, 2011, 659 'R( //0, /4%

/5 (rticle 613, Re$ised Penal 'ode%

e 8a)phil Pro+ect (rellano 8a) Foundation
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt26http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt29http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt30http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt31http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt32http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt33http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt34http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt35http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt18http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt19http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt20http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt21http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt22http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt23http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt24http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt25http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt26http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt27http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt28http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt29http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt30http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt31http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt32http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt33http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt34http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2014/jun2014/gr_159031_2014.html#rnt35

lasanas.vs.people.2014

Documents