GR 45629; (September, 1938) (Digest)
G.R. No. 45629 ; September 22, 1938
ANTILANO G. MERCADO, petitioner, vs. ALFONSO SANTOS, Judge of First Instance of Pampanga, respondents. ROSARIO BASA DE LEON, ET AL., intervenors.
FACTS
Petitioner Antilano G. Mercado filed a petition for the probate of his deceased wife’s will. The Court of First Instance of Pampanga admitted the will to probate on June 27, 1931, based on the testimony of an attesting witness and without opposition. Almost three years later, the intervenors (heirs of the deceased) moved to reopen the proceedings, alleging lack of jurisdiction, but their motion was denied, and this denial was affirmed by the Supreme Court. Subsequently, intervenor Rosario Basa de Leon initiated a series of criminal complaints against Mercado for the alleged forgery of the same probated will. Mercado was arrested and required to post bail on four separate occasions between 1932 and 1935, with the complaints eventually being dismissed or reinvestigated. The criminal case proceeded to trial in the Court of First Instance, which overruled Mercado’s demurrer and motion to dismiss based on the prior probate decree. The Court of Appeals denied Mercado’s petition for certiorari to halt the criminal proceedings. Mercado now seeks review, contending that the probate of the will bars his criminal prosecution for forgery and that he has been denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial.
ISSUE
1. Whether the probate decree conclusively establishing the will’s due execution bars Mercado’s criminal prosecution for the alleged forgery of the same will.
2. Whether Mercado was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial due to the repeated and protracted criminal complaints.
RULING
1. Yes. The probate of a will is conclusive as to its due execution. Under Section 625 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the allowance of a will by the court is “conclusive as to its due execution.” This conclusiveness extends to the authenticity of the will and negates any claim of forgery. The Court cited jurisprudence and authorities stating that a probate decree is conclusive on the will’s validity, the testator’s sound mind, and that the will is genuine and not a forgery. Therefore, the prior probate decree bars Mercado’s criminal prosecution for the forgery of the same instrument.
2. Yes. Mercado was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. The repeated initiation of criminal complaints (four times) over several years, resulting in repeated arrests, bail postings, and legal defenses, constituted an oppressive use of the judicial process. The Court found the intervenors’ actions were aimed at coercing a settlement through continuous threat of prosecution, causing Mercado significant hardship, expense, and anxiety, thereby violating his right to a speedy trial.
The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals and ordered the criminal proceedings against Mercado quashed.
AI Generated by Armztrong.