THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.
ELIAS BORROMEO, defendant-appellant.
G.R. No. L-61873 October 3l, 1984
FACTS:
This is an appeal from the decision of the court finding accused Elias Borromeo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of parricide and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Accused-appellant contends that the trial court erred in holding that he and Susana Taborada (the deceased) were legally and validly married because there was no marriage contact executed in their wedding, hence he could be liable only for homicide, not parricide.
Other than the stand of appellants counsel against the existence of marriage in order to lessen or mitigate the penalty imposable upon his client, accused Elias Borromeo himself admitted that the deceased-victim was his legitimate wife.
ISSUE:
Was there a valid marriage between the accused-appellant and the deceased-victim?
RULING:
There is no better proof of marriage than the admission of the accused of the existence of such marriage. (Tolentino vs. Paras).
Persons living together in apparent matrimony are presumed, in the absence of any counter presumption or evidence special to the case, to be in fact married. The reason is that such is the common order of the society, and if the parties were not what they thus hold themselves out as being, they would be living in constant violation of decency and law.
The presumption in favor of the matrimony is one of the strongest known in law. The reason for this presumption is well settled in Perido vs. Perido, thus:
The basis of human society throughout the civilized world is that of marriage. Marriage is not only a civil contract, but it is a new relation, an institution in the maintenance of which the public is deeply interested. Consequently, every intendment of the law leans toward legalizing matrimony
