G.R. No. 1181. July 01, 1905

Counsel for the defendant Engracio Villafuerte asks for a revision
of the decision rendered in the second instance and that a new hearing
be granted in this case, but, notwithstanding the reasons alleged by
him to this effect, we are of the opinion that the motion aforesaid
should be denied.

It is fully proven in the record of the case that the defendants,
adulterers, were duly informed and knew well about the charges made
against them, of the motive and origin of the charges, and of the
character of the sentence, for which reason on pleading not guilty of
the crime charged to them they knew perfectly well the nature and
condition of the crime which was imputed to them. The complaint which
begins the record is in accordance with the provisions of section 6 of
General Orders, No. 58, and no fault or defect can be alleged to be
contained which could constitute an infraction of section 5 of the act
of Congress dated July 1, 1902. The complaint which is signed by the
husband, Felix Villa, expressly states that Eugenia Rabano was and is
his wife; that both lived together in marital relations in the same
house; that the defendant Villafuerte went to live in the same house
and that both defendants were several times caught in the act of sexual
intercourse; and therefore on being informed of the charges made
against them they were well aware that the crime imputed to them was
adultery for the reason that Rabano and Villafuerte had lain illicitly
together, Rabano being a married woman., A man and woman who are living
in marital relations under the same roof are presumed to be legitimate
spouses, united by virtue of a legal marriage contract, according to
paragraph 28 of section 334 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This
presumption can only be rebutted by sufficient contrary evidence, which
has not been presented by the petitioner. It must be noted, considering
the testimony of the witnesses on both sides, Villa and Rabano had the
reputation in the town where they lived of being married legitimately.

A complaint should not allege any facts other than those which
constitute the crime. The defense or the allegations of the defendant
are not essential elements of the crime, since if they were proven the
action would be null and void and of no effect. In the decision which
this court rendered and which the defense asks to have set aside, the
existence of the crime of adultery was found, as well as the guilt of
the defendants, by virtue of the clear proof of the facts adduced by
the prosecution as these facts appear fully and clearly’related in the
decision, and not because of the silence of the defendants.
Furthermore, the court having accepted the consideration of the facts
made by the judge as proven, it is not permissible, nor should it be,
to allow same to be impugned. The judge, as well as this court,
rightfully found that the crime of adultery had been committed and
proven from the presumption, which was also proven, that Villa and
Rabano were legally married, and this finding can not and should not be
modified validly without anything to the contrary being shown.

By virtue of the reasons above stated, we are of the opinion that the motion should be denied with the costs.

Arellano C. J., and Johnson, J., concur.

---

CONCURRING

CARSON, J., with whom concurs WILLARD, J.,:

All the bases of this motion were fully discussed in the oral
argument and in the printed brief of the defendants and were taken into
consideration by this court before dictating its decision, and
therefore I am of the opinion that the motion for a new trial should be
denied.