sic itur ad astra

   Rule 111 | Criminal Procedure - Prejudicial Question Facts: The case involves Luisito Pulido who was charged with Bigamy for contracting a second marriage with Rowena Baleda while his marriage with Nora Pulido was still subsisting. Pulido claimed that both his marriages were void, but the court found that his first marriage was valid despite the absence of a marriage license.  The Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction for bigamy since he entered into a second marriage while his prior marriage was subsisting, without obtaining a judicial declaration of the nullity of his prior marriage.  Issue: WoN a judicial declaration of nullity of marriage secured after the celebration of the second marriage should be considered a valid defense in Bigamy cases. Ruling: Parties in a bigamy case are not required to obtain a judicial declaration of absolute nullity of a void ab initio first and subsequent marriages in order to use it as a defense. This applies to marriages cele...

  Rule 111 | Criminal Procedure - Prejudicial Question Facts: On February 1997, Meynardo Beltran filed a petition for nullity of his marriage on the ground of psychological incapacity with Charmaine Felix after twenty-four years of being married. Charmaine  Felix subsequently filed a concubinage case against Beltran and his paramour Milagros Salting. The prosecution found probable cause and ordered the filing of an Information6 against them before the Metropolitan Trial Court of Makati City. Beltran filed a Motion to Defer Proceedings Including the Issuance of the Warrant of Arrest, stating that the pendency of the civil case for declaration of nullity of his marriage posed a prejudicial question to the determination of the criminal case.  Judge Alden Vasquez Cervantes denied the motion, stating that the issue in the civil case was not a prejudicial question to the concubinage case. Issue: Whether the pendency of the petition for declaration of nullity of Meynar...

Rule 111 | Criminal Procedure - Prejudicial Question Facts:    Private respondent George Lagos was charged by Petitioner Vincent E. Omictin with the crime of estafa for allegedly refusing to return two company vehicles entrusted to him by Saag Phils.  Lagos filed a motion to suspend proceedings on the basis of a prejudicial question due to a pending case with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) involving the same parties.  The CA granted the motion to suspend proceedings. The SEC case was transferred to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) pursuant to Republic Act No. 8799 vesting in the RTCs jurisdiction over intra-corporate disputes. Issue: WoN a prejudicial question exists to warrant the suspension of the criminal proceedings pending the resolution of the intra-corporate controversy that was originally filed with the SEC. Assailed Ruling: The delay in the delivery of the motor vehicles by the petitioner to Saag Corporation was due to the petitioner's contention...

  Rule 111 | Criminal Procedure  Names Joselito R. Pimentel Maria Chrysantine Pimentel y Lacap Principle Institution of criminal and civil actions Section 7, Rule 111 -  Prejudicial Question Facts:  (1) O n October 25, 2004, P rivate R espondent  Maria Chrysantine Pimentel  filed an action for frustrated parricide against Petitioner Joselito R. Pimentel  before the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City. (2) On February 7 2005, petitioner received summons to appear before the  Regional Trial Court of Antipolo City, for the pretrial  and trial of civil case  for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage under  Section 36 of the Family Code on the ground of psychological incapacity. (3)  On February 11 2005, petitioner filed an urgent motion to suspend the  proceedings before the RTC Quezon City  Petitioner asserted that since the relationship between  the offender and the victim is a key element in parricide, the outco...