Sarto v People

G.R. No. 206284

February 18, 2018

FACTS

On 3 October 2007, Redante was charged with the crime of bigamy for allegedly

contracting two (2) marriages: the first, with Maria Socorro G. Negrete (Maria

Socorro), and the second, without having the first one legally terminated, with

private complainant Fe R. Aguila (Fe). The charge stemmed from a criminal

complaint filed by Fe against Redante on 4 June 2007. The accusatory portion of the

Information reads: That on or about December 29, 1998, in the City of Naga,

Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the abovenamed

accused, having been previously united in lawful marriage with one Ma. Socorro G.

Negrete, as evidenced by hereto attached Certificate of Marriage mark as Annex

"A," and without said marriage having been legally dissolved, did then and there,

willfully and feloniously contract a second marriage with FE R. AGUILA-SARTO,

herein complaining witness, to her damage and prejudice. CONTRARY TO LAW.

4 During his arraignment on 3 December 2007, Redante entered a plea of "not

guilty." Pre-trial ensued wherein Redante admitted that he had contracted two

marriages but interposed the defense that his first marriage had been legally

dissolved by divorce obtained in a foreign country. On 22 May 2008, the defense

filed a motion to allow the taking of Maria Socorro's deposition considering that she

was set to leave the country on the first week of June 2008. 5 This was granted by

the RTC in its Order,6 dated 26 May 2008. Maria Socorro's deposition was taken on

28 May 2008. On 22 August 2008, the prosecution moved for a modified or reverse
trial on the basis of Redante's admissions. 7 The RTC granted the motion in its Order,

8 dated 27 August 2008, wherein the defense was directed to present its case ahead

of the prosecution.

ISSUE

WHETHER THE TRIAL AND APPELLATE COURTS ERRED WHEN THEY

FOUND PETITIONER REDANTE SARTO y MISALUCHA GUILTY BEYOND

REASONABLE DOUBT OF BIGAMY

Ruling

The RTC Ruling in its judgment, the RTC found Redante guilty beyond reasonable

doubt of the crime of bigamy. The trial court ratiocinated that Redante's conviction

is the only reasonable conclusion for the case because of his failure to present

competent evidence proving the alleged divorce decree; his failure to establish the

naturalization of Maria Socorro; and his admission that he did not seek judicial

recognition of the alleged divorce decree. The dispositive portion of the decision

reads: WHEREFORE, finding the accused Redante Sarto y Misalucha guilty beyond

reasonable doubt for the crime of Bigamy punishable under Article 349 of the

Revised Penal Code, and after applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, this Court

hereby sentenced him an imprisonment of two (2) years, four (4) months and one (1)

day of prision correccional, as minimum, to eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision

. 22 mayor, as maximum. Aggrieved, Redante appealed before the CA. The CA

Ruling In its assailed decision, the CA affirmed the RTC's Judgment. The appellate

court ratiocinated that assuming the authenticity and due execution of the Certificate

of Divorce, since the order of divorce or the divorce decree was not presented, it

could not ascertain whether said divorce capacitated Maria Socorro, and
consequently Redante, to remarry. It continued that Redante failed to present

evidence that he had filed and had secured a judicial declaration that his first

marriage had been dissolved in accordance!"/ 19 Id. at 34, Exh. "A." 20 Id. at 35,

Exh. "B." 21 Id. at 36, Exh. "C.'' 22 Id.at157. Decision 5 G.R. No. 206284 with

Philippine laws prior to the celebration of his subsequent marriage to Fe. The

dispositive portion of the assailed decision provides: