Case Digest: Cacho v. People of the Philippines

LUCIO MORIGO y CACHO, petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
G.R. No. 145226. February 06, 2004.

Facts:

Lucio Morigo and Lucia Barrete were boardmates at the house of one Catalina Tortor at Tagbilaran City, Bohol for four years. Their communication was broken after school year 1977-1978. In 1984, Lucio received a letter from Lucia from Singapore. After an exchange of letters, the two became sweethearts. Lucia later returned to the Philippines but left again for Canada to work there. Nonetheless, the sweethearts maintained a constant communication. Lucia, later came back to the Philippines. The two agreed to get married, thus, they were married at Iglesia de Filipina Nacional at Catagdaan, Pilar, Bohol. Lucia reported back to her work in Canada leaving Lucio behind. Barely a year, August 19, 1991, Lucia filed with Ontario Court a petition for divorce which was granted and took effect in February of 1992. On October that year Lucia married Maria Lumbago also in Tagbilaran City. September 21, 1993, Lucio filed a complaint for nullity of marriage in Regional Trial Court of Bohol on the ground that there was no marriage ceremony actually took place. He was later charge with Bigamy filed by City Prosecutor of the Regional Trial Court of Bohol.

The petitioner moved for the suspension of the criminal case invoking prejudicial question. The civil case is a prejudicial question to bigamy. The Court granted unfortunately denied by the motion for reconsideration of the prosecution.

The Regional Trial Court of Bohol held Lucio guilty beyond reasonable doubt of bigamy.

He filed an appeal to the Court of Appeals. While the case was pending in Court of Appeals, the trial court granted the petition for nullty of marriage since no marriage ceremony took place. No appeal was taken from this decision, thus, became final and executory. But the Court of Appeals denied the petition for lack of merit. Hence, the petition was elevated to the Supreme Court.

Issue: 

Whether or not petitioner committed bigamy and if so, whether his defense of good faith is valid.

Held:

The first element of Bigamy as laid down in Bobis v. Bobis was not present.
No marriage ceremony. What transpired was a mere signing of the marriage contract by the two, without the presence of a solemnizing officer. The mere signing of the same bears no semblance to a valid marriage and thus, needs no judicial declaration of nullity.

The Supreme Court need not tarry on the issue of the validity of his defense of good faith or lack of criminal intent, which is moot and academic.