Sep 18, 2021

Maximo Alvarez vs. Susan Ramirez, G.R. No. 143439 October 14, 2005, RULE 130. Sec. 23. Disqualification by reason of Marriage.

 

RULE 130. Sec. 23. Disqualification by reason of Marriage.

Maximo Alvarez vs. Susan Ramirez, G.R. No. 143439 October 14, 2005

SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:

FACTS: Maximo Alvarez set Susan Ramirez’ house on fire. Susan is Maximo’s sister-in-law. Maximo knew that when he set Susan’s house on fire, Susan and other members of her family including his sister, Esperanza (Maximo’s wife) was inside.

Susan Ramirez is the complaining witness in a criminal case for arson against Maximo pending before the RTC. The prosecutor called Esperanza Alvarez to the witness stand as the first witness against Maximo, her husband. Maximo and his counsel raised no objection. Esperanza testified that he saw his husband pouring gasoline outside Susan’s house.

In the course of Esperanza’s direct testimony, the latter showed "uncontrolled emotions," prompting the trial judge to suspend the proceedings.

Maximo filed a motion to disqualify Esperanza from testifying against him pursuant to Rule 130 of the Revised Rules of Court on marital disqualification.

RTC disqualified Esperanza from further testifying and deleting her testimony from the records.  CA nullified and set aside RTC’s decision.

ISSUE: Whether or not Esperanza can testify against her husband in the criminal case.

HELD: YES. Sec. 22. Rule 130. Disqualification by reason of marriage. – During their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected spouse, except in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter’s direct descendants or ascendants."

In Ordoño vs. Daquigan, when an offense directly attacks, or directly and vitally impairs, the conjugal relation, it comes within the exception to the statute that one shall not be a witness against the other except in a criminal prosecution for a crime committed by one against the other.

Obviously, the offense of arson by Maximo, directly impairs the conjugal relation between him and his wife. His act, as embodied in the Information for arson filed against him, eradicates all the major aspects of marital life such as trust, confidence, respect and love by which virtues the conjugal relationship survives and flourishes.

As shown by the records, prior to the commission of the offense, the relationship between Maximo and his wife was already strained. They were separated de facto almost 6 months before the incident. The evidence and facts presented reveal that the preservation of the marriage between them is no longer an interest the State aims to protect.

Esperanza is allowed to testify against her husband in the Arson case.

No comments:

Post a Comment