177.) Nicolas V. Hon. Enriquez.docx

177.) Nicanor P. Nicolas v. Hon. Juan P. Enriquez G.R. No. L-8371 | June 30, 1955 | Reyes, A., J. Author: Gavina Topic: Conduct and Character as Evidence Doctrine: Where the previous sexual relations sought to be proved were far removed from the time the illicit act now complained of, and having taken place when there was no legal impediment to the same, they furnish no rational basis for the inference that they would be continued after complainant’s marriage to one of the defendant had created such impediment and made continuance of sexual relations between defendants a crime Facts:  Corazon Vizacarra filed a case of concubinage against Jimmy William Nelson and Priscialla Fontanosa  The lower court ruled out testimony tendind to show that a boy, Paul Nelson, was the son of both defendants for being immaterial for the reason that the inquiry into the paternity of a natural child is forbidden except in a direct action  The prosecution filed an action for mandamus to compel to trial court to admit the preferred evidence contending that prior sexual relations between the defendants were admissible to show propensity to commit the offense charged Issue: (1) W/N mandamus should be granted, and incidentally, the evidence admitted Held: No. What one did at one time is no proof of his having done the same or a similar thing at another time. The boy was born five years before the complainant’s marriage to one of the defendants. This means that the previous sexual relations sought to be proved were far removed in point in time from the illicit act. It furnishes no rational basis. The evidence is immaterial and irrelevant, Dispositive Portion: The writ prayed for is denied. Note: The actual case is only 2 pages long.