Title
Asetre vs. Asetre
Case
G.R. No. 171536
Decision Date
Apr 7, 2009
Hanz Asetre's death was initially ruled a suicide, but his brother contested it, alleging murder. Prosecutors charged his wife and others, but the DOJ reversed, citing insufficient evidence. The Court of Appeals reinstated charges, but the Supreme Court upheld the DOJ, finding no grave abuse of discretion.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 171536)

Facts:

Background and Incident:
On December 27, 2000, Hanz Dietrich Asetre was found dead in his residence, which also housed his printing press business. His wife, petitioner April Joy Asetre, claimed that Hanz committed suicide by hanging himself using bedcovers. She stated that Hanz was depressed, suicidal, a drug dependent, an alcoholic, and violent. However, Hanz's brother, respondent Junel Asetre, disputed this, claiming that the mark on Hanz's neck was from a rope, not bedspreads. He also alleged that petitioner Buenaventura Gamboa knew who killed Hanz but was reluctant to reveal it due to fear of April's father.

Prosecution's Findings:
The Office of the City Prosecutor of Bacolod found probable cause against April, Hanz's first cousins Galinzchel and Buenaventura Gamboa, and printing press worker Benjie Ebcas. The investigating prosecutor concluded that the petitioners were physically and actively interacting with Hanz shortly before his death and that they connived to kill him. The prosecutor rejected the suicide theory, citing medico-legal findings that Hanz could not have hanged himself.

DOJ's Reversal:
The DOJ Acting Secretary Ma. Merceditas N. Gutierrez reversed the prosecutor's resolution, stating that there was insufficient evidence to sustain the theory of conspiracy to commit murder. The Secretary noted the lack of motive and the unsubstantiated quarrel incident between Hanz and April. The DOJ directed the withdrawal of the information against the petitioners.

Court of Appeals' Decision:
The Court of Appeals reversed the DOJ Secretary's resolution, finding that the circumstantial evidence strongly suggested that Hanz was murdered. The appellate court agreed with the investigating prosecutor's findings and held that the DOJ Secretary committed grave abuse of discretion in reversing the resolution.

Issue:

  1. Whether the opinions of Dr. Samson Gonzaga, Dr. Luis Gamboa, and Dr. Nicasio Botin that Hanz did not commit suicide have sufficient weight compared to the petitioners' testimonies and circumstantial evidence supporting the suicide theory.
  2. Whether the Court of Appeals' conclusion that there is probable cause to charge petitioners for parricide is supported by sufficient evidence and is in accord with jurisprudence and law.
  3. Whether the Court of Appeals correctly concluded that the DOJ Secretary committed grave abuse of discretion.
  4. Whether the petition for certiorari filed by private respondents before the Court of Appeals should have been dismissed, considering that the RTC was not impleaded and the information was already ordered withdrawn.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court granted the petition, reversing the Court of Appeals' decision and affirming the DOJ Secretary's resolution. The Court held that the DOJ Secretary did not commit grave abuse of discretion in finding insufficient evidence to indict the petitioners for murder and parricide. The Court emphasized that the determination of probable cause is primarily an executive function, and judicial review is limited to cases of grave abuse of discretion.

Ratio:

  • (Unlock)

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.