Practice question
A valid first marriage subsists. The second marriage otherwise has the necessary requisites but is declared void solely because it is bigamous. The accused argues that this very declaration necessarily defeats Article 349 because every bigamous marriage is civilly void. What is the proper response?
- Accept it, eliminating bigamy whenever its own marital impediment exists.
- Reject it; the second marriage must have an independent void-from-the-start defect for this Pulido defense, rather than merely its bigamous character.
- Accept it if the declaration was obtained after conviction.
- Treat all second marriages as valid for every civil purpose.
- Acquit without examining any element.
Legal references
- Revised Penal Code, Act No. 3815, specified articles, as amended: https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/28/20426; Articles 348–350.
- Pulido v People, G.R. No. 220149, July 27, 2021, en banc main decision, bigamy and void marriages: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2021/jul2021/gr_220149_2021.html
- Genio v People, G.R. No. 261666, January 24, 2024, main decision, marriage requisites and criminal proof: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2024/jan2024/gr_261666_2024.html
- RA 10655, repeal of RPC Article 351: https://lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2015/ra_10655_2015.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.