Title
People vs Casipong
Case
G.R. No. 6608
Decision Date
Sep 5, 1911
Juan Casipong married Teodora Juanico in 1909 but left her to live with Gregoria Hongoy. Charged with concubinage, Casipong was convicted, but Hongoy was acquitted due to insufficient evidence of public scandal.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 216007-09)

Key Dates

The marriage of Juan Casipong and Teodora Juanico occurred on March 5, 1909. The provincial fiscal filed a complaint on August 24, 1910, and the judgment from which the appeal arises was rendered by Judge Adolph Wislizenus on the same day.

Applicable Law

The relevant statutory provision is Article 437 of the Penal Code, which governs the offense of concubinage. It stipulates that a husband keeping a concubine outside of his marriage may be punished with prision correccional, while the concubine may face banishment.

Factual Background

Following his marriage to Teodora Juanico, Juan Casipong moved in with Gregoria Hongoy approximately two weeks later, effectively abandoning his wife. Teodora, motivated by rumors of her husband's infidelity, visited the barrio of Bolocboloc and observed Casipong and Hongoy in close proximity, reaffirming her suspicions of an illicit relationship. Though Teodora did not witness any explicit sexual acts, her observation of the couple's intimate behavior formed the basis for the complaint.

Proceedings in Court

The Court of First Instance of Cebu presided over the case, leading to a decision on the same day the complaint was filed. The court found Casipong guilty of concubinage, sentencing him to one year, eight months, and twenty-one days of prision correccional. Gregoria Hongoy was sentenced to two years of banishment.

Grounds for Appeal

The defendants appealed the decision, though Casipong later withdrew his appeal, leaving only Hongoy's case for consideration. The appeal raised critical questions about the sufficiency of the evidence proving the existence of scandalous conduct that would substantiate the charge of concubinage.

Legal Standards for Conviction

The court elucidated that a central component for convicting Casipong under the law was the requirement that his conduct must have produced scandal within their community. Drawing from principles established by the Supreme Court of Spain, the court articulated that mere immorality was insufficient; instead, the actions must provoke public outrage and damage societal morals.

Evaluation of Evidence

The court concluded that the evidence presented—primarily from the offended wife and her companion—did not convincingly establish Casipong's public living arran

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.