You're currently signed in as:
User
Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/ceab?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09
[US v. TOMAS MACABABBAG](https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/ceab?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09)
{case:ceab}
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. 10564, Aug 06, 1915 ]

US v. TOMAS MACABABBAG +

DECISION

31 Phil. 257

[ G. R. No. 10564, August 06, 1915 ]

THE UNITED STATES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. TOMAS MACABABBAG AND MARIA BALISI, DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.

D E C I S I O N

JOHNSON, J.:

These defendants were charged with the crime of amancebamiento.  The complaint  alleged: "That on or about, and  for some five months prior to, July 11, 1914, in the municipality of Tuguegarao, Province of Cagayan,  P. I., the said Tomas Macababbag, being legally married to Dominga Bulaqui, did willfully, unlawfully, and criminally, with gross insult to and contempt of the latter, take into the conjugal home and there keep the other accused, Maria Balisi, as his mistress,  with scandal to the public and in violation of the law."

Upon the said  complaint the defendants were duly arrested, arraigned, tried, found guilty of the crime charged, and sentenced in  accordance with the provisions of article 437 of the Penal Code.  Tomas Macababbag was sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of two years and four months of prision  correctional, and  to  pay one-half the  costs. Maria Basili was sentenced to suffer the penalty of destierro for a period of two years and four months, and during that period to remain away from the center  of the municipality of  Tuguegarao, and not to  come nearer than  a distance  of 25 kilometers, and to pay one-half the  costs. From that sentence each of the defendants appealed to this court.

While  the appellants make  no  specific assignments of error, they argue  that the evidence adduced during the trial of the cause was insufficient to show that they are guilty of the crime charged.  The appellants argue  that "according to the  provisions of article 437 of the Penal Code, no crime  is committed, unless the acts  alleged  to have  been committed  were committed under scandalous circumstances."   The  appellants argue  that  there was no public scandal connected with the commission of the crime charged in the present case. The appellants, however, have not carefully read said article 437.  A married man who keeps a mistress in his conjugal dwelling is guilty of the  crime of concubinage.   "Scandalous circumstances" are not necessary to.make him  guilty of  said crime.  It  is only  when the mistress is kept elsewhere that "scandalous  circumstances" become  an  element  of  the crime.  We  find no reason for modifying the sentence of the lower court after a careful examination  of the evidence brought here.  The same is, therefore, hereby affirmed, with costs.   So ordered.

Arellano, C. J., Torres, Carson, Trent, and  Araullo, JJ., concur.

tags