US v. Feliciano · G.R. 12724

Petitioner: US
Respondent: Feliciano
Citation: G.R. No. 12724
Court: Supreme Court
Decided: August 10, 1917

Whether sufficient circumstantial evidence exists to convict defendant of adultery

Summary

This 1917 Supreme Court case established important precedents for adultery prosecutions in the Philippines. Margarita Feliciano was convicted of adultery after leaving her husband and cohabiting with Pedro Velasquez for three months in Manila. The Supreme Court affirmed her conviction based on circumstantial evidence, rejecting her argument that the case should be dismissed due to the dismissal of her co-accused. The Court held that the acquittal of one party in adultery cases does not automatically require acquittal of the other, and that strong circumstantial evidence can sufficiently establish adultery even without direct proof. The case demonstrates the courts' willingness to convict on circumstantial evidence in adultery cases, given the secretive nature of such crimes, and clarifies that adultery charges against co-accused parties can have independent outcomes.

Related cases

Other Philippine cases on the same provisions and issues.

Valencia v. People G.R. No. 244657
Donio-Teves v. Vamenta G.R. No. L-38308
US v. Bacas G.R. No. 5297
People v. Mantelo G.R. No. 29531
Castro, Jr. v. Court of Appeals G.R. No. L-22159
People v. Pitoc G.R. No. 18513
Maulit v. Samonte G.R. No. 34484
US v. Ananias G.R. No. 9772
US v. Coronel G.R. No. 4630
US v. Pulongbaret G.R. No. 5110
US v. Uri G.R. No. 11371
Francisco v. Tayao G.R. No. 26435

Featured in research

In-depth Intellegal research that discusses this case.

Adultery and Concubinage in the Philippines (RPC Arts. 333-334)

By the Intellegal Editorial Board · August 10, 1917

Search Philippine case law on Intellegal →

AI-assisted case analysis — for research only. Verify against the official decision. A research aid, not legal advice; using this page creates no attorney-client relationship. For legal advice, consult a Philippine lawyer. Verify every holding and citation against the official decision (Supreme Court E-Library / Official Gazette) before relying on it.