View full case

VERONICO TENEBRO v. CA

FACTS:

Petitioner Veronico Tenebro contracted marriage with Leticia Ancajas on April 10, 1990. Tenebro later informed Ancajas that he had previously been married to Hilda Villareyes on November 10, 1986. Tenebro showed Ancajas a photocopy of a marriage contract between him and Villareyes. Ancajas confirmed with Villareyes that she was indeed married to Tenebro. Ancajas then filed a complaint for bigamy against Tenebro. Tenebro denied the validity of his marriage to Villareyes, claiming it was solely for the purpose of enabling her to get an allotment from his office. The Regional Trial Court found Tenebro guilty of bigamy, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision. Tenebro appealed, arguing that his first marriage had been declared null and void ab initio, and therefore the elements of the crime of bigamy were absent. The prosecution presented the marriage contract between Tenebro and Villareyes, along with a handwritten letter from Villareyes confirming their marriage. Tenebro presented certifications from the National Statistics Office and the City Civil Registry of Manila stating that they had no record of the marriage between Tenebro and Villareyes. However, the court held that the marriage contract was sufficient evidence of the first marriage, and the certifications did not adequately assail its validity.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the certified copy of the marriage contract is admissible as evidence of the marriage between the petitioner and Villareyes.

  2. Whether the subsequent declaration of nullity of the second marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity affects the crime of bigamy committed.

  3. Whether or not the essential requisites for the validity of the marriage were satisfied.

  4. Whether or not the marriage, even if null and void, can produce legal consequences such as incurring criminal liability for bigamy.

RULING:

  1. The certified copy of the marriage contract, issued by a public officer in custody, is admissible as the best evidence of the marriage between the petitioner and Villareyes. The marriage contract serves as positive evidence of the existence of the marriage and should be given greater weight than documents testifying to the absence of any record of the marriage. The absence of a record does not invalidate a marriage as long as all requisites for validity are present.

  2. The subsequent declaration of nullity of the second marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity does not affect the crime of bigamy committed. A declaration of nullity of a second marriage does not absolve an individual of criminal liability for contracting a second or subsequent marriage during the subsistence of a valid marriage. The law penalizes the mere act of contracting a second or subsequent marriage during the validity of a previous marriage, regardless of the grounds for nullity.

  3. The essential requisites for the validity of the marriage were satisfied. Both parties were of legal age and they voluntarily contracted the marriage with the required license before the proper authorities and in the presence of witnesses.

  4. The nullity of a marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity does not render it completely without legal effects. Among these effects is that children conceived or born before the judgment of absolute nullity of the marriage shall be considered legitimate. Thus, the crime of bigamy can still be charged if an individual contracts multiple marriages, even if the earlier marriage is null and void.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Certified copies of public records are admissible as evidence of their contents.

  • Documentary evidence of the absence of a record is different from evidence of the absence or invalidity of a marriage ceremony.

  • The absence of a record does not invalidate a marriage if all requisites for validity are present.

  • A subsequent declaration of nullity based on psychological incapacity does not affect criminal liability for bigamy.

  • The law penalizes the act of contracting a second or subsequent marriage during the validity of a previous marriage, regardless of the grounds for nullity.

  • The essential requisites for the validity of a marriage are the legal capacity of the contracting parties and their consent freely given in the presence of the solemnizing officer.

  • The formal requisites for the validity of a marriage are the authority of the solemnizing officer, marriage license, and marriage ceremony wherein the parties personally declare their agreement to marry before the solemnizing officer in the presence of at least two witnesses.

  • The judicial declaration of the nullity of a marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity retroacts to the date of the celebration of the marriage, but such marriage still produces legal consequences, including incurring criminal liability for bigamy.

  • Marriage is a special contract that is characterized by its permanence. Deliberately contracting multiple marriages while previous marriages are still subsisting shows a deliberate disregard for the sanctity of marriage, which can result in criminal liability for bigamy.

  • The penalty for the crime of bigamy is prision mayor, with a duration of six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12) years. The indeterminate sentence law applies, allowing for a minimum term of imprisonment to be taken from the penalty next lower in degree, which is prision correccional with a duration of six (6) months and one (1) day to six (6) years.