Diego Vs Castillo

Admin Complaint vs RTC judge Castillo for rendering an unjust judgement in a criminal case /
ignorance
1965 A person used another name with single status so that she can be married in Dagupan City

1978 Decree of Divorce in texas issued to Jorge de Perio

1987 Crecencia de Perio then was married with Manuel P Diego, now using Lucena Escoto

1999 De Perio was acquitted with cost, since the state cannot prove accused guilt without a
doubt.
Judge Castillo believed based on the evidence that Crecencia did not have malicious intent.
On Bigamy, it must be commited with criminal intent.

Castillo cited that the second marriage is bigamouse however Crecencia as a laywoman
understood that the decree meant that she could marry again, and ineptitude should not be
confused with criminal intent.
Mistake of Fact is a good defense of good faith in a bigamy case, from a mistake of law which
does not excuse even a layperson from liability. (EVERYONE IS PRESUMED to KNOW THE LAW)

Knowingly rendering an unjust judgment requires that a judge must have made with
conscious and deliberate intent to do an injustice.
Diego failed to prove such intent which warrants the dismissal of the admin complaint.
Error commited by judge being gross and patent, the same constitutes ignorance of the law of
nature sufficient to warrant disciplinary action.
PENALTY
Reprimanded with a stern warning ; 10,000, Davide.