Case Digest (G.R. No. 150758)
Facts:
Veronico Tenebro v. The Honorable Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 150758, February 18, 2004, Supreme Court En Banc, Ynares‑Santiago, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Veronico Tenebro married Leticia Ancajas on April 10, 1990, before Judge Alfredo B. Perez, Jr., and the pair cohabited until late 1991, when Tenebro told Ancajas he had been previously married to Hilda Villareyes on November 10, 1986 and then left to live with Villareyes. Ancajas later learned that Tenebro had in fact contracted another marriage on January 25, 1993 with Nilda Villegas; she also received a handwritten letter from Villareyes confirming her marriage to Tenebro.
Ancajas filed a complaint for bigamy. The Information alleged that Tenebro, having been previously united in lawful marriage with Villareyes, contracted a second marriage with Ancajas on April 10, 1990 while the first marriage had not been legally dissolved. Tenebro pleaded not guilty and admitted cohabitation with Villareyes but denied a valid marriage ceremony, claiming the marriage contract was signed only to secure an allotment for Villareyes. He presented certifications from the National Statistics Office and the City Civil Registry of Manila stating they had no record of a marriage between him and Villareyes.
On November 10, 1997, the Regional Trial Court (City Trial Court) of Lapu‑lapu City, Branch 54, convicted Tenebro of bigamy under Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code and imposed an indeterminate sentence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and denied reconsideration. Tenebro filed the instant petition for review (seeking relief from the Court of Appeals decision) to the Supreme Court.
Relevant to the defense, a separate civil judgment (Regional Trial Court of Argao, Cebu, Branch 26, Civil Case No. AV‑885) dated November 20, 1995 had declared Tenebro’s marriage to Ancajas null and void ab initio on the ground of Ancajas’ psychological incapacity un...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the prosecution prove beyond reasonable doubt the existence of petitioner’s prior marriage to Hilda Villareyes and thus the first two elements of bigamy under Article 349 of the Revised Penal Code?
- Does a subsequent judicial declaration that a second marriage is null and void ab initio on the ground of psychological incapacity negate criminal liability for bigamy for a marriage contracted during the sub...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)