Francheska Fabian

BSBA- HROM 4-1

FINALS IN NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT
Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court Manila
[G.R. No . 47756, June 10,1941]
LUIS OCAMPO, Petitioner, v. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents
SYLLABUS 1. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE; CONCUBINAGE; "COHABIT"
DEFINED. The term "cohabit" means to dwell together, in the manner of husband and wife,
for some period of time, as distinguished from occasional, transient interviews for unlawful
intercourse. And, whether an association, for illicit intercourse, has been such as to constitute
an unlawful assumption of the conjugal relation, is, in every case, a question of fact and the
extent of such association as to constitute a cohabitation within the meaning of the law, is a
matter of courts appreciation.
Charged with the crime of concubinage in the Court of First Instance of Albay, petitioner
Luis Ocampo was found guilty and sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of from six (6) months
of arresto mayor to two (2) years, eleven (11) month and ten (10) days of prision correccional,
and to the accessories of the law. This judgment was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The
relations between petitioner Luis Ocampo and his coaccused Igmedia Refe began in 1937. In
September of that year, petitioner with Igmedia went to Naga where they dwelt together as
husband and wife in the same house and were often seen together attending shows and
dances. In October of the same year, they went for a thermal bath in Tiwi, Albay, where, in the
first visit, they stayed for three days, and in the second, for four days. During their entire stay,
they dwelt together as husband and wife in the house of Alfonsa Toledo, occupying one room
where they slept alone. The legal question raised in this appeal is whether, on the basis of the
foregoing facts, petitioner may properly be held guilty of concubinage. concubinage may be
committed in either of the following ways: (1) by keeping a mistress in the conjugal dwelling; (2)
by having sexual intercourse, under scandalous circumstances, with a woman who is not his
wife; and (3) by cohabiting with such woman in any other place. The concern here is only with
the third way of committing the offense under which petitioner was convicted. The term "cohabit"
means to dwell together, in the manner of husband and wife, for some period of time, as
distinguished from occasional, transient interviews for unlawful intercourse. And, whether an
association, for illicit intercourse, has been such as to constitute an unlawful assumption of the
conjugal relation, is, in every case a question of fact , and the extent of such association as to
constitute a cohabitation within the meaning of the law, is a matter of courts appreciation. In the
instant case, petitioners conduct with his coaccused was not confined to isolated interviews for
unlawful intercourse. He and his coaccused dwelt together as husband and wife in the same
house in Naga, Camarines Sur, where they were seen attending shows and dances; again, in
Tiwi, Albay, they dwelt together as husband and wife in the same house for seven days and
nights where they slept together and alone in one room. We are of the opinion and so hold that
such association is sufficient to constitute a cohabitation within the meaning of the law even
disregarding proofs of actual sexual intercourse. Petitioner maintains that the letter sent to him
by complainant in the latter part of June, 1937, constitutes consent to his illicit relations and is.
The letter was construed by the trial court under the facts and circumstances of the case as not
constituting consent or condonation, and his finding has not been reversed by the Court of
Appeals. Judgment is affirmed, with costs against petitioner.

SALAVADOR FLORDELIZ Y ABENOJAR, Petitioner versus PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

G.R. NO. 186441
Sometime in March 1995, ABC, the wife of petitioner and the mother of private
complainants AAA and BBB, left for Malaysia as an overseas worker. AAA and (BBB were left
under the care and custody of petitioner. They resided in a small house in Quezon Hill, Baguio
City. In April 1995, while sleeping with BBB and AAA, who was then eleven (11) years old,
petitioner woke up AAA, touched her vagina, then played with it. AAA cried and told petitioner
that it was painful. The latter stopped, but warned AAA not to tell anyone about it; otherwise, she
would be harmed. Petitioner allegedly committed the same acts against AAA repeatedly.
Petitioner and his daughters later transferred residence and lived with the formers siblings.
Not :long after, petitioner was convicted of homicide and imprisoned in Muntinlupa City.
Consequently, AAA and BBB lived with their grandparents in La Trinidad, Benguet. While
petitioner is in prison AAA and BBB would visit him occasionally and give him greeting cards.
In 2001, petitioner was released on parole. He would frequently fetch AAA and BBB from
their grandparents house during weekends and holidays and they would stay with him in
Gabriela Silang, Baguio City. Unsatisfied with the abuses committed to AAA, petitioner also
started molesting BBB on May 2002
The abuse continued until the mother of the complainant came home from vacation,
ABC immediately reported the abuse to the national bureau of investigation. After conducting
medical examinations on AAA and BBB, the attending physician remarked that there was a
disclosure of sexual abuse and she noted the presence of hymenal notch in posterior portion of
hymenal rim that may be due to previous blunt force or penetrating trauma suggestive of abuse.
With these findings, petitioner was charged with the crimes of Acts of Lasciviousness,
committed against AAA, and nine (9) counts of Qualified Rape through Sexual
Assault,committed against BBB, before the RTC.
Petitioner appealed. On appeal, the CA affirmed petitioners conviction with a
modification of the amount of his civil liabilities.petitioners claim that the charges against him
were products of ABCs fabrication to cover up the infidelity she committed while working
abroad.
CA denied the appeal and said that No matter how enraged a mother may be, it would
take nothing less than psychological depravity for her to concoct a story too damaging to the
welfare and well-being of her own daughter. Courts are seldom, if at all, convinced that a mother
would stoop so low as to expose her own daughter to physical, mental and emotional hardship
concomitant to a rape prosecution.
The Court of Appeals July 29, 2008 Decision and February 16, 2009 Resolution in CAG.R. CR No. 30949 are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS. The Court finds petitioner Salvador
Flordeliz y Abenojar: 1. GUILTY of seven (7) counts of RAPE Through Sexual Assault in
Criminal Case Nos. 23072-R, 23073-R, 23074-R, 23076-R, 23077-R, 23079-R, and 23080-R.
He is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of ten (10) years of prision mayor, as
minimum, to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months of reclusion temporal, as maximum, for
each count. Petitioner is ordered to indemnify BBB P30,000.00 as civil indemnity; P30,000.00
as moral damages; and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, for each count; 2. GUILTY of ACTS
OF LASCIVIOUSNESS in Criminal Case No. 23145-R. He is sentenced to suffer the
indeterminate penalty of thirteen (13) years, nine (9) months and eleven (11) days of reclusion
temporal, as minimum, to sixteen (16) years, five (5) months and ten (10) days of reclusion

temporal, as maximum. He is likewise ordered to pay a fine of P15,000.00 and to indemnify AAA
P20,000.00 as civil indemnity, P15,000.00 as moral damages, and P15,000.00 as exemplary
damages;