Arroyo, Jr. vs.

Court of Appeals

G.R. No. 96602, 96715

FELICIANO, J

Nov 19, 1991

In the case of Arroyo, Jr. v. Court of Appeals, a husband files a criminal

complaint for adultery against his wife and another man, leading to their
conviction based on witness testimonies and photographs, despite claims of
consent and recanted testimony. The court rejects various defenses and
emphasizes the importance of consent or pardon prior to the filing of a
criminal complaint.

Facts:
 Husband, Eduardo Arroyo Jr., filed a criminal complaint for adultery against his wife,
Ruby Vera Neri, and another man.
 The events took place on November 2, 1982, in Baguio City.
 Both defendants pleaded not guilty.
 After trial, they were convicted of adultery.
 The trial court based its decision on witness testimonies and photographs showing the
defendants in intimate poses.

Issue:
1. Whether Dr. Neri's affidavit of desistance is sufficient to cast reasonable doubts on his
credibility.
2. Whether Mrs. Neri's constitutional right against self-incrimination had been violated.
3. Whether Dr. Neri's alleged extra-marital affair precludes him from filing the criminal
complaint on the ground of pari delicto.
4. Whether Dr. Neri's manifestation is sufficient basis for the granting of a new trial.

Ruling:
 The Court denied the motion for reconsideration in G.R. No. 96602 and the petition for
review in G.R. No. 96715.
 Dr. Neri's testimony was credible, and his admission of his wife's infidelity was
admissible as evidence.
  The Court rejected the argument of pari delicto, stating that no consent or agreement
allowing each other to marry or cohabit with other persons was present.
 The Court doubted the truthfulness and reliability of Dr. Neri's belated recantation, as it
was inconsistent with his previous statements.
 The Court emphasized the importance of consent or pardon prior to the filing of a
criminal complaint in cases of adultery.
 For consent or pardon to benefit the accused, it must be given before the filing of the
complaint.
 The affidavit of desistance and the compromise agreement were executed after the trial
court had already rendered its decision.
 The Court upheld the conviction of the defendants based on the testimonies of
prosecution witnesses and the photographs showing them in intimate poses.
 The Court rejected various defenses raised by the defendants.

Ratio:
 Dr. Neri's affidavit of desistance was not sufficient to cast reasonable doubts on his
credibility because it was executed after the trial court had already rendered its decision.
 Mrs. Neri's constitutional right against self-incrimination was not violated as her
admission of infidelity was not coerced or compelled.
 Dr. Neri's alleged extra-marital affair did not preclude him from filing the criminal
complaint on the ground of pari delicto because no consent or agreement allowing each
other to marry or cohabit with other persons was present.
 Dr. Neri's belated recantation was doubted by the Court as it was inconsistent with his
previous statements.
 Consent or pardon must be given before the filing of the complaint to benefit the accused
in cases of adultery.
 The affidavit of desistance and the compromise agreement were executed after the trial
court had already rendered its decision, therefore, they did not affect the conviction of the
defendants.
 The testimonies of prosecution witnesses and the photographs showing the defendants in
intimate poses were sufficient evidence to uphold their conviction.
 The Court emphasized the importance of consent or pardon prior to the filing of a
criminal complaint in cases of adultery.