Facts

Respondent CSC Chair Constantino-David received an anonymous letter complaint alleging of

an anomaly taking place in the Regional Office of the CSC. The respondent then formed a team
and issued a memo directing the team to back up all the files in the computers found in the
Mamamayan Muna (PALD) and Legal divisions.
Several diskettes containing the back-up files sourced from the hard disk of PALD and LSD
computers were turned over to Chairperson David. The contents of the diskettes were examined
by the CSCs Office for Legal Affairs (OLA). It was found that most of the files in the 17 diskettes
containing files copied from the computer assigned to and being used by the petitioner,
numbering about 40 to 42 documents, were draft pleadings or lettersin connection with
administrative cases in the CSC and other tribunals. On the basis of this finding, Chairperson
David issued the Show-Cause Order, requiring the petitioner, who had gone on extended leave,
to submit his explanation or counter-affidavit within five days from notice.
In his Comment, petitioner denied the accusations against him and accused the CSC Officials
of fishing expedition when they unlawfully copied and printed personal files in his computer.
He was charged of violating R.A. No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials
and Employees). He assailed the formal charge and filed an Omnibus Motion ((For
Reconsideration, to Dismiss and/or to Defer) assailing the formal charge as without basis
having proceeded from an illegal search which is beyond the authority of the CSC Chairman,
such power pertaining solely to the court.
The CSC denied the omnibus motion and treated the motion as the petitioners answer to the
charge. In view of the absence of petitioner and his counsel, and upon the motion of the
prosecution, petitioner was deemed to have waived his right to the formal investigation which
then proceeded ex parte.
The petitioner was dismissed from service. He filed a petition to the CA which was dismissed
by the latter on the ground that it found no grave abuse of discretion on the part of the
respondents. He filed a motion for reconsideration which was further denied by the appellate
court. Hence, this petition.

Issue
WON the search conducted by the CSC on the computer of the petitioner constituted an illegal
search and was a violation of his constitutional right to privacy
Ruling

The search conducted on his office computer and the copying of his personal files was lawful
and did not violate his constitutional right.
Ratio Decidendi

In this case, the Court had the chance to present the cases illustrative of the issue raised by the
petitioner.
Katz v. United States 389 U.S. 437 (1967), the US Supreme Court held that the act of FBI agents in
electronically recording a conversation made by petitioner in an enclosed public telephone
booth violated his right to privacy and constituted a search and seizure. Because the
petitioner had a reasonable expectation of privacy in using the enclosed booth to make a
personal telephone call, the protection of the Fourth Amendment extends to such area. Moreso,
the concurring opinion of Mr. Justice Harlan noted that the existence of privacy right under
prior decisions involved a two-fold requirement: first, that a person has exhibited an actual
(subjective) expectation of privacy; and second, that the expectation be one that society is
prepared to recognize as reasonable (objective).