Rueda v. Sandiganbayan

PARDO, J.:

The Case The case is an appeal via certiorari from the decision of the Sandiganbayan1 finding petitioner Juan A. Rueda, Jr. guilty of malversation of public funds, and sentencing him to an indeterminate penalty of ten (10) years and one (1) day of prision mayor , as minimum, to seventeen (17) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum, to pay a fine of P107,299.02 with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency,2 3 denying reconsideration. The Charge On April 19, 1991, Special Prosecution Officer I Gregorio G. Pimentel, Jr., Office of the Ombudsman filed with the Sandiganbayan an information charging petitioner Juan A. Rueda, Jr., with malversation of public funds, defined and penalized under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code, to wit: "That on or about the period of February 8, 1989 to September 20, 1989, in Tigaon, Camarines Sur, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, a public officer, being then the Municipal Treasurer of Tigaon, Camarines Sur, and as such was accountable for all public funds collected and received by him by reason of the duties of his office, taking advantage of his official position and with grave abuse of confidence, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously misappropriate, embezzle and convert to his own personal use and benefit the total sum of P107,299.02, Philippine Currency, to the damage and prejudice of the Philippine government in the amount aforesaid."4 Upon arraignment on November 29, 1991, petitioner entered a plea of not guilty.5 Trial ensued.

The facts, as found by the Sandiganbayan,6 are as follows: At times material hereto, petitioner Rueda was the municipal treasurer of Tigaon, Camarines Sur. On September 20, 1989, a team of state auditors, headed by Amparo O. Albeus, conducted an audit examination of the accountabilities of petitioner Rueda as municipal treasurer of Tigaon, Camarines Sur, covering the period February 8, 1989 to September 20, 1989. As a result of the audit, it was assumed that petitioner had a "cash shortage"

of P107,299.02 (Exh. "A-2"). The corresponding report of cash examination was thereafter accomplished.

When confronted therewith, petitioner affixed his signature (Exh. "A-1") on the certification on the dorsal portion of the report to the effect that his accountability for the funds of the municipal government of Tigaon, Camarines Sur was correctly stated. On October 3, 1989, the auditors sent a formal written demand to petitioner Rueda, requiring him to immediately produce the sum of P107,299.02, representing the "shortage"

on his accountabilities as municipal treasurer of Tigaon, Camarines, Sur, and to explain in writing within seventy-two (72) hours why the shortage occurred (Exh. "B"). Notwithstanding receipt of the letter (Exh.

"B-1"), petitioner failed to have the said amount forthcoming or to tender his written explanation why the shortage occurred. In his defense, petitioner Rueda disclaimed any criminal liability on the ground that the assumed "shortage" was the result of unliquidated cash advances made by several municipal officials and employees of Tigaon, Camarines Sur, spanning the period covered by the audit as evidenced by various "chits"

or "vales" (Exhs. 11-15), and expenses of the municipal government of Tigaon as evidenced by several disbursement vouchers (Exhs.

16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 25, 26, 27,28, 29 and 30). Petitioner Rueda declared that the municipal officials and employees took the cash advances from the cash collections of the municipal collectors before the cash collections, in the total amount of P41,234.71, were turned over to him as municipal treasurer. What they turned over to him were the "chits"

and "vales" evidencing such cash advances.

Although he never tolerated the practice and had verbally warned the municipal officials and employees from making those cash advances, they continued to do so.7 Petitioner Rueda stressed that the cash advances were made with the consent of the municipal mayor, and had been the practice in the municipality of Tigaon long before he assumed office as municipal treasurer. He would later on deduct the cash advances made from their respective salaries in installment, and after they were paid, he would turn over the amount to the office of the municipal treasurer. With respect to the subject "chits"

and "vales", petitioner Rueda declared that after the same were paid, he turned over the amount to the office of the municipal treasurer who then credited those payments as "restitution" of the shortage on his total cash accountability.8 Thus, the "debtors" themselves liquidated the cash advances and petitioner's accountabilities had been fully restituted before the start of the preliminary investigation in the office of the Ombudsman.

A day before the state auditors from the Commission on Audit conducted an audit examination of his cash accountabilities, the internal auditors from the provincial treasurer's office conducted a similar examination. This group of internal auditors advised him not to bring the matter about "vales" or cash advances to the COA audit team because they would only disallow them for lack of supporting documents.

This is the reason why he did not present the disbursement vouchers in the course of the audit conducted by the State Auditors on September 20, 1989. After the audit of September 20, 1989, petitioner Rueda began completing the supporting documents of those disbursement vouchers. Upon completion of those "vales"

and "chits" as supporting documents, he submitted the same together with the disbursement vouchers to the in-charge-of office of the municipal treasurer, who credited the amounts reflected on those disbursement vouchers as "restitution" of the shortage on his total accountability.

Consequently, petitioner Rueda stated that as of July 11, 1990, before the start of the preliminary investigation in the Office of the Ombudsman, all his financial accountabilities had been fully restituted. The cash advances, in the form of "chits" and "vales"

amounting to P41,234.71, had been wholly paid or redeemed by their respective debtors. The disbursement vouchers of P53,700.00 representing various legitimate expenses of the municipality of Tigaon, Camarines Sur and the collection deposits in the amount of P12,384.06 were all liquidated. The in-charge-of office of the municipal treasurer of Tigaon, Camarines Sur issued eight official receipts, for various amounts received from petitioner Rueda, to wit: 1.

Official Receipt No. 0382089 dated 12/14/89 for P65,000.00 2. Official Receipt No. 0129158 (O) dated 12/29/89 for P618.56 3. Official Receipt No. 0382090 (N) dated 1/08/90 for P6,000.00 4.

Official Receipt No. 0382091 (N) dated 1/08/90 for P12,000.00 5. Official Receipt No. 0382095 (N) dated 4/02/90 for P15,000.00 6. Official Receipt No. 0382100 (N) dated 5/31/90 for P3,000.00 7.

Official Receipt No. 4846890 (P) dated 7/09/90 for P666.40 8. Official Receipt No. 4833595 (P) dated 7/11/90 for P5,014.06 Total