S Est Lex Paralegals, Consultancy & Advance Training

S Est Lex Paralegals, Consultancy & Advance Training Paralegals assist lawyers in all stages and preparation of documents necessary to comply with state and local regulations in the conduct of legal process.

Hindi maaaring gamiting ebidensya ang katibayan ng sexual disposition o sekswal na nakaraan ng isang biktima sa kahit an...
25/10/2024

Hindi maaaring gamiting ebidensya ang katibayan ng sexual disposition o sekswal na nakaraan ng isang biktima sa kahit anumang criminal proceeding na may kaugnayan sa kasong child sexual abuse.

Ito ang iginiit ng Korte Suprema sa isang Desisyon na isinulat ni Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., kung saan napatunayan ng Second Division ng Korte Suprema na guilty si Adrian J. Adrales (Adrales) sa kasong qualified trafficking in persons sa ilalim ng Anti-Trafficking of Persons Act of 2003 (Republic Act No. 9208).

Hinatulan si Adrales ng habambuhay na pagkabilanggo at pinagbabayad ng danyos na PHP 1.8 million matapos mapatunayan na binugaw niya ang 14 anyos na si AAA sa iba’t ibang lalaki noong taong 2011, kapalit ng pera.

Paliwanag ng Korte, may trafficking kapag ang mga indibidwal ay ni-recruit, dinala o nilipat—may pahintulot o kaalaman man o wala —sa ilalim ng mga pagbabanta, pamimilit, panlilinlang, o pag-abuso sa kapangyarihan para sa mapagsamantalang layunin tulad ng prostitusyon.

Ang krimen ay qualified trafficking kapag ang sangkot ay mga menor de edad. Ito ay may kaukulang parusa na habambuhay na pagkabilanggo.

Depensa ni Adrales, kilala umano si AAA bilang pr******te sa kanilang lugar.

Pero ayon sa Korte, protektado si AAA ng sexual abuse shield rule sa ilalim ng Section 30(a) ng Rule on Examination of a Child Witness.

Ang sexual abuse shield rule ay naglalayong protektahan ang mga biktima laban sa invasion of privacy, potential embarrassment, at sexual stereotyping na nangyayari kapag isinapubliko ang kanilang maseselang sekswal na detalye. Ang proteksyon na ito ay naghihikayat sa mga biktima na magsalita laban sa mga nang-abuso sa kanila.

Basahin ang buong press release sa: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-evidence-of…

Basahin ang buong teksto ng Desisyon sa: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/242473-people-…



SC: Persons Convicted of Heinous Crimes still entitled to Good Conduct Time Allowance
04/04/2024

SC: Persons Convicted of Heinous Crimes still entitled to Good Conduct Time Allowance

Important Landmark Case on Bigamy 2021 (5 minutes read) ISSUE: HERNANDO, J.: May an accused indicted for Bigamy be excul...
27/12/2023

Important Landmark Case on Bigamy 2021
(5 minutes read)

ISSUE: HERNANDO, J.: May an accused indicted for Bigamy be exculpated on the basis of the judicial declaration of nullity of his first or second marriage?

2021 LANDMARK CASE ON BIGAMY: LUISITO G. PULIDO, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.
EN BANC [ G.R. No. 220149, July 27, 2021 ]
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=308140161971042&id=100083251812872&mibextid=Nif5oz

FACTS: The Antecedents: Pulido and Rowena U. Baleda (Baleda) were charged before the RTC with Bigamy in an Information5 that reads:

That on or about the 31st day of July 2005, in the City of Las Piñas, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court the above-named accused, being then legally married to the complainant NORA A. PULIDO, which marriage is still existing and has not been legally dissolved, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously contract a second marriage with one ROWENA U. BALEDA, who knowingly consented thereto, which second marriage has all the requisites for validity. CONTRARY TO LAW.6

Petitioner pleaded not guilty to the crime charged. Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.

Records show that on September 5, 1983, then 16-year old petitioner married his teacher, then 22-year old private complainant Nora S. Arcon (Arcon) in a civil ceremony at the Municipal Hall of Rosario, Cavite solemnized by then Mayor Calixto D. Enriquez.7 Their marriage was blessed with a child born in 1984.8

The couple lived together until 2007 when Pulido stopped going home to their conjugal dwelling. When confronted by Arcon, Pulido admitted to his affair with Baleda. Arcon likewise learned that Pulido and Baleda entered into marriage on July 31, 1995 which was solemnized by Reverend Conrado P. Ramos. Their Marriage Certificate indicated Pulido's civil status as single.9

Hurt by the betrayal, Arcon charged10 Pulido and Baleda with Bigamy on December 4, 2007. In his defense, Pulido insisted that he could not be held criminally liable for bigamy because both his marriages were null and void. He claimed that his marriage with Arcon in 1983 is null and void for lack of a valid marriage license while his marriage with Baleda is null and void for lack of a marriage ceremony.

Baleda, on the other hand, claimed that she only knew of Pulido's prior marriage with Arcon sometime in April 2007. She alleged that even prior to the filing of the bigamy case, she already filed a Petition to Annul her marriage with Pulido before the RTC of Imus, Cavite docketed as Civil Case No. 1586-07. In a Decision11 dated October 25, 2007, the RTC declared her marriage with Pulido as null and void for being bigamous in nature. This ruling attained finality, there being no appeal filed thereto.12

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court: In its June 22, 2009 Decision,13 the trial court convicted petitioner of Bigamy and acquitted Baleda.

RULING: Supreme Court Summary and Ruling:

To summarize and for future guidance, the parties are not required to obtain a judicial declaration of absolute nullity of a void ab initio first and subsequent marriages in order to raise it as a defense in a bigamy case. The same rule now applies to all marriages celebrated under the Civil Code and the Family Code. Article 40 of the Family Code did not amend Article 349 of the RPC, and thus, did not deny the accused the right to collaterally attack the validity of a void ab initio marriage in the criminal prosecution for bigamy.

However, if the first marriage is merely voidable, the accused cannot interpose an annulment decree as a defense in the criminal prosecution for bigamy since the voidable first marriage is considered valid and subsisting when the second marriage was contracted. The crime of bigamy, therefore, is consummated when the second marriage was celebrated during the subsistence of the voidable first marriage. The same rule applies if the second marriage is merely considered as voidable.

To our mind, it is time to abandon the earlier precedents and adopt a more liberal view that a void ab initio marriage can be used as a defense in bigamy even without a separate judicial declaration of absolute nullity. The accused may present testimonial or documentary evidence such as the judicial declaration of absolute nullity of the first and/or subsequent void ab initio marriages in the criminal prosecution for bigamy. The said view is more in accord with the retroactive effects of a void ab initio marriage, the purpose of and legislative intent behind Article 40 of the Family Code, and the rule on statutory construction of penal laws. Therefore, the absence of a "prior valid marriage" and the subsequent judicial declaration of absolute nullity of his first marriage, Pulido is hereby acquitted from the crime of Bigamy charged against him.

WHEREFORE, the Petition for Review on Certiorari is hereby GRANTED. The March 17, 2015 Decision and August 18, 2015 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 33008 are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Petitioner Luisito G. Pulido is ACQUITTED.

Let entry of judgment be issued.

SO ORDERED.

Gesmundo C.J., Leonen, Carandang, Inting, Zalameda, M. Lopez, Gaerlan, Rosario, and J. Lopez, JJ., concur.

Perlas-Bernabe, and Caguioa, JJ., please see concurring opinion.

Lazaro-Javier, J., see concurring opinion.

NOTICE OF JUDGMENT

Sirs/Mesdames:

Please take notice that on July 27, 2021 a Decision, copy attached herewith, was rendered by the Supreme Court in the above-entitled case, the original of which was received by this Office on November 11, 2021 at 9:30 a.m.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) MARIFE M. LOMIBAO-CUEVAS
Clerk of Court

The Supreme Court has ruled that in the chain of custody in drugs cases, the seizure, marking, physical inventory, and p...
27/12/2023

The Supreme Court has ruled that in the chain of custody in drugs cases, the seizure, marking, physical inventory, and photograph-taking of the seized drug must be done immediately at the place of arrest.

READ: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-inventory-a…

18/12/2023
11/12/2023
02/12/2023

Credit card debts of dead father

09/11/2023

The oath-taking and roll signing ceremonies for the 2023 Bar exam passers will be held on December 22 at the SMX Convention Center in Pasay City.

30/10/2023

𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐄𝐐𝐔𝐈𝐏𝐎𝐈𝐒𝐄 𝐑𝐔𝐋𝐄

• The equipoise rule provides that where evidence in a criminal case is evenly balanced, the constitutional presumption of innocence tilts the scales in favor of the accused. [People v. Erguiza, 571 SCRA 634, 660]
• The inculpatory facts and circumstances are capable of two or more explanations, one of which is consistent with his guilt, then the evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty and is not sufficient to support a conviction. Under such circumstances, the presumption of innocence must prevail and the court must acquit. [Atienza v. People, G.R. No. 188694, February 12, 2014]
• There is, therefore, no equipoise if the evidence is not evenly balanced. Said rule is not applicable where the evidence presented is not equally weighty. The equipoise rule cannot be invoked where the evidence of the prosecution is overwhelming. [Malana v. People, 549 SCRA 451, 465]
• But any doubt shall be resolved in favor of the accused. [People v. Cruz, G.R. 194234]

30/10/2023

Address

Legazpi
4500

Telephone

+639398251765

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when S Est Lex Paralegals, Consultancy & Advance Training posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Share