Case Digest (G.R. No. 191425)
Facts:
Atilano O. Nollora, Jr. v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 191425, September 07, 2011, Supreme Court Second Division, Carpio, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Atilano O. Nollora, Jr. was criminally charged with bigamy together with co-accused Rowena P. Geraldino in an Information filed on August 24, 2004. The Information alleged that on December 8, 2001 in Quezon City Nollora, already legally married to Jesusa Pinat Nollora, contracted a second marriage with Geraldino.
At arraignment, counsel for Nollora refused to enter a plea and the trial court entered a plea of not guilty for him; Geraldino pleaded not guilty. At pre-trial the parties stipulated to the validity of the first marriage (April 6, 1999), the celebration of the second marriage (December 8, 2001), Nollora’s admission in his counter-affidavit that he contracted the second marriage, and Geraldino’s attachment of their marriage certificate.
At trial the prosecution presented the testimony of Jesusa Pinat and a sponsor who corroborated that Nollora and Pinat were married and that Pinat later learned, by certification from the NSO and by a confrontation with Geraldino, of Nollora’s subsequent marriage. Nollora testified admitting both marriages but asserted he had converted to Islam in 1992 and therefore believed he could lawfully have more than one wife under Islamic law; he introduced various certificates and a pledge of conversion and elicited testimony from Hadji Abdul Qasar Madueno, who attested to Nollora’s conversion and explained Muslim marriage formalities.
The Regional Trial Court, Branch 215, Quezon City, in a Decision dated November 19, 2007 (Crim. Case No. Q-04-129031), convicted Nollora of bigamy and acquitted Geraldino for failure of proof. The RTC found that even if Nollora was a Muslim convert, his second marriage was not celebrated in accordance with the Code of Muslim Personal Laws (Presidential Decree No. 1083) and that he failed to comply with required Shari’a procedures; the RTC also emphasized that Nollora’s concealment of his marital status and religion in the marriage certificates bore on criminal intent.
Nollora appealed to the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 31538; the appellate court, in a Decision dated September 30, 2009, affirmed the RTC, rejecting Nollora’s invocation of religious freedom because the marriages were not solemnized according to Muslim law and Article 13(2) of the Code of Muslim Personal Laws directed application of the Family Code where a Muslim–non‑M...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Is petitioner Atilano O. Nollora, Jr. guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of bigamy? ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)