Case Digest (G.R. No. L-10016)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Proceso S. Aragon, G.R. No. L-10016, February 28, 1957, the Supreme Court En Banc, Labrador, J., writing for the Court.The accused, Proceso S. Aragon (who at times used the name Proceso Rosima), first married Maria Gorrea on September 28, 1925, in the Philippine Independent Church in Cebu. While that marriage subsisted, he contracted a second canonical marriage with Maria Faicol on August 27, 1934, in Santa Teresita Church, Iloilo City; witnesses and documentary evidence at trial established this marriage and the identity of the groom.
Maria Gorrea (the first wife) died in Cebu City on August 5, 1939. After her death the accused brought Maria Faicol to Cebu in 1940 and the couple lived there intermittently thereafter; the accused worked as a traveling salesman and commuted between Iloilo and Cebu. The record contains testimony that the marital relations between the accused and Maria Faicol were unhappy and allegedly marked by violence; in January 1953 the accused sent Maria Faicol back to Iloilo purportedly for treatment.
While Maria Faicol was away, the accused admitted contracting a third marriage with Jesusa C. Maglasang on October 3, 1953, in Sibonga, Cebu. The trial court found the sequence of marriages established by certificates and testimony and convicted the accused of bigamy for contracting the third marriage while the second marriage to Maria Faicol still subsisted. The trial court reasoned that, even if Act No. 3613 did not expressly authorize a judicial declaration of nullity for a marriage void ab initio, the accused could not validly contract the third marriage without dissolution of his marriage to Maria Faicol either by her death or by a judicial declaration at her instance.
The accused appealed to the Supreme Court. He relied principally on People v. Mendoza (95 Phil. 845), interpreted as standing for the proposition that a subsequent marriage contracted during the lif...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the conviction for bigamy (for contracting the third marriage with Jesusa C. Maglasang) proper, or should the conviction be reversed and the accused acquitted?
- Whether, under Section 29 of the Marriage Law (Act No. 3613), a subsequent marriage contracted during the lifetime of a prior spouse is void from its performance without need of a jud...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)