Teves V. People [miranda].docx

Teves v. People G.R. No. 188775 – August 24, 2011 J. Perez Topic: Crimes against Civil Status – Bigamy Petitioner: Cenon R. Teves Respondents: People of the Philippines and Danilo R. Bongalon FACTS:  November 26, 1992: Cenon Teves married Thelma Jaime-Teves before the MTC of Muntinlupa City.  Thelma left to work abroad after the marriage. She would only go back to the PH for vacation.  In 2002, while on vacation, Thelma found out that her husband Cenon married an Edita Calderon.  To verify this, Thelma went to the NSO and got a copy of the marriage certificate, which indicated that her husband Cenon and Edita got married on December 10, 2001 at the Divine Trust Consulting Services, Malhacan, Meycauayan, Bulacan.  February 13, 2006: Danilo Bongalon, Thelma’s uncle, filed a complaint before the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Malolos City, Bulacan, accusing Cenon of committing bigamy.  May 4, 2006: During the pendency of the criminal case for bigamy, the RTC of Caloocan City rendered a decision declaring Cenon and Thelma’s marriage null and void on the ground that Thelma is physically incapacitated to comply with her essential marital obligations (FC 36).  June 8, 2006: Cenon was charged with bigamy under RPC 3491.  June 27, 2006: The RTC decision became final by virtue of a Certification of Finality.  August 15, 2007: The trial court found Cenon guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of bigamy under RPC 349. o Penalty (pursuant to the Indeterminate Sentence Law): Imprisonment of 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day of prision correccional (min.) to 6 years, and 1 day of prision mayor (max.)  Cenon appealed to the CA, arguing that: o His criminal action or liability had already been extinguished, and o He was not guilty of bigamy due to the defective Information filed by the prosecution.  January 21, 2009: The CA dismissed Cenon’s appeal.  February 11, 2009: Cenon filed a MFR with the CA  DENIED (July 2, 2009). ISSUE + HELD: W/N Cenon may be held guilty for the crime of bigamy under RPC 349 despite a judicial declaration of nullity of his previous marriage – YES  Cenon’s arguments: 1) Since his previous marriage was declared null and void  no marriage at all  no bigamy  Differentiated between a previous valid or voidable marriage vs. a marriage null and void ab initio: - Previous valid or voidable marriage: requires a judicial dissolution before one can validly contract a second marriage - Marriage null and void ab initio: need not be judicially determined 2) The ruling in Mercado v. Tan is inapplicable in his case because in the Mercado case, the prosecution for bigamy was initiated before the declaration of nullity of marriage was filed.  In Cenon’s case, the first marriage had already been legally dissolved at the time the bigamy case was filed in court. 1

Article 349. The penalty of prision mayor shall be imposed upon any person who shall contract a second or subsequent marriage before the former marriage has been legally dissolved, or before the absent spouse has been declared presumptively dead by means of a judgment rendered in the proper proceedings.



SC: Cenon’s contentions must fail! o Elements of the crime of bigamy under RPC 349: 1) That the offender has been legally married; 2) That the marriage has not been legally dissolved or, in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead according to the Civil Code; 3) That he contracts a second or subsequent marriage; and 4) That the second or subsequent marriage has all the essential requisites for validity. o The present case has all the elements of the crime of bigamy.  1st element: Cenon was legally married to Thelma on November 26, 1992.  2nd and 3rd element: He contracted a second or subsequent marriage with Edita on December 10, 2001. At the time of his second marriage with Edita, his marriage with Thelma was legally subsisting.  The finality of the decision declaring the nullity of his first marriage with Thelma was only on June 27, 2006, or 5 years after his second marriage to Edita. th  4 element: The second or subsequent marriage of Cenon with Edita has all the essential requisites for validity. Cenon has not disputed the validity of such subsequent marriage. o A declaration of the absolute nullity of a marriage is explicitly required either as a cause of action or a ground for defense.  If the absolute nullity of a previous marriage is sought to be invoked in order to contract a second marriage, the sole basis acceptable in law for the second marriage to be free from legal infirmity is a final judgment declaring the previous marriage void.  Such judicial declaration of nullity is also for the protection of the spouse who, believing that his/her marriage is illegal and void, marries again. With the judicial declaration, the person who marries again cannot be charged with bigamy. o If Cenon’s contention were to be allowed (see #2 under ‘Cenon’s arguments:’), a person who commits bigamy can simply evade prosecution by immediately filing a petition for the declaration of nullity of his earlier marriage and hope that a favorable decision is rendered before anyone institutes a complaint against him.  To do so would make the crime of bigamy dependent on the ability or inability of the Office of the Public Prosecutor to immediately act on complaints and eventually file Informations in court.

RULING: Petition DENIED. CA Decision (January 21, 2009) AFFIRMED in toto.