A Crim 25204 Lonzanida 01 30 2007

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES Sandiganbayan
Quezon City ------Fifth Division
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Pl aintiff, - versus -
Criminal Case No. 25204
Present:
ROMEO D. LONZANIDA and CORTEZ-ESTRADA, Chairman, CECILIA U. LEGRAMA. JURADO, A.J. and Accus DIAZ-BALDOS, A.J. ed. Promulgated:
January 30, 2007
______________________________ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DECISION A.J. CORTEZ-ESTRADA: In an Information dated December 15, 1998, abovenamed accused were charged with the crime of malversation of public funds, defined and penalized under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code, allegedly committed as follows:
That on or about October 1, 1996 and for sometime prior or subsequent thereto, in the Municipality of San Antonio, Province of Zambales, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable tribunal, the above named accused ROMEO D. LONZANIDA, being then Municipal Mayor of San Antonio, Zambales, in connivance and conspiracy with co-accused CECILIA U. LEGRAMA, being then Municipal Treasurer of San Antonio, Zambales, who, as such, is accountable for public funds received and/or entrusted to her by reason of her office, both, while in the performance of their respective functions, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously and with grave abuse of confidence, take, misappropriate and convert to their personal use and
Decision/Criminal Case No. 25204 People vs. Lonzanida and Legrama Page -2----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------benefit, the amount of P1,152,900.751 from such public funds, to the damage of the government, in the aforesaid amount. CONTRARY TO LAW.
The Court issued a Hold Departure Order against both accused on March 12, 1999.2 Accused Legrama voluntarily surrendered and posted cash bond on March 24, 19993 while accused Lonzanida voluntarily surrendered and posted cash bond on March 25, 1999.4 Both accused were duly arraigned and similarly entered a plea of not guilty to the offense charged.5 During the pre-trial, the parties agreed on the following stipulation of facts:6
1. That during the period material to this case which is sometime on October 1, 1996 or sometime prior or subsequent thereto, accused Lonzanida and Legrama were public officers, the former being the Municipal Mayor of San Antonio, Zambales while the latter, being the Municipal Treasurer of the said municipality; 2. That during the same period, Lonzanida, the Mayor of the Municipality of San Antonio and Legrama, the Municipal Treasurer and having received public funds by reason of her office in the amount of P1,152,900.75 (sic); 3. That sometime in October 1996, the Commission on Audit conducted an audit examination on the cash and accounts of the Municipal Treasurer Legrama and the latter was found short in the amount of P1,152,900.75; 4. That a demand letter was issued by the COA to accused Legrama for her to pay or restitute the said shortage but she was only able to restitute the amount of P60,000.00.
Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.
The figure appearing in the information filed with this Court is P152,900.75. In the Courts hearing dated April 27, 1999, Prosecutor Jesus Micael asked for an amendment of the information to reflect the correct amount involved which should be P1,152,900.75. 2 Record, Vol. I, page 20. 3 Ibid. at page 29. 4 Ibid. at page 35. 5 Ibid. at pages 42 and 52. 6 Ibid. at page 57.
Decision/Criminal Case No. 25204 People vs. Lonzanida and Legrama Page -3-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PROSECUTIONS TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE To prove its case against the two accused, the prosecution presented in court Virginia Dial Bulalacao, team leader of the Commission on Audit (COA) Audit Team, whose findings became the basis for the instant indictment. testified as follows:
7
She
She has been an auditor in the COA since 1978. Among her duties and functions as such is to audit and examine the accounts of accountable officers in her custody, in order to determine the physical existence of cash in the possession of the municipal treasurer and the accountable officers with accountable forms with or without the money value. Sometime in October 6, 1996, they conducted an audit of the cash and account of Cecilia Legrama, the municipal treasurer in the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales, by virtue of an Office Order 96-09 dated September 5, 1996 (Exhibit E). The other members of the team were auditor Teresita Cayabyab and auditing examiner Lourdes Castillo. They conducted a cash count to verify the
accountable forms with or without money value, as well as the cash tickets, and reconciled the same with the deposit accounts maintained by the municipality.
TSN, hearing of September 13, 14, 1999,
After the audit, they submitted an Audit Report (Report of Cash Examination) dated October 1, 1996 (Exhibit B), to the Provincial Auditors Office and the Commission on Audit. Provincial Auditor The report submitted to the Gregorio Manlicmot was
accompanied with a Memorandum dated January 3, 1997 (Exhibit B-1). The Audit Report covers the transaction from June 24, 1996 to September 4, 1996. which Php4,896,265.31 while her The total debit for was was total credit accused Legrama was accountable
Php3,652,187.82, leaving her total accountability to Php1,244,077.49. The cash presented and the allowed cash items were in the amount of Php91,176.74, leaving a shortage of Php1,152,900.75. During the audit, Legrama presented to them chits, disbursement vouchers, sales invoices and vales but these were not considered in the audit report because they were not documented and hence disallowed. auditing parlance, these are called cash items. Examination (Exhibit B-2). of the mayor. In This
disallowance was included in the Report of Cash Legrama explained that note she released cash advances or vales based on the order He merely gave a handwritten instructing her to pay. During the exit conference, as the
accused Legrama identified the signatures appearing on the cash items which were disallowed, signature of accused Lonzanida. Accused Lonzanida
also affirmed his signatures appearing on the cash
items during the said exit conference, which is the last step in the conduct of the cash examination. It is here where they discuss with the municipal treasurer their audit findings and recommendations. She, together with her team members, Teresita Cayabyab and Lourdes Castillo, executed a Joint Affidavit on July 7, 1997 (Exhibit A) regarding the audit which they conducted. Accused Legrama was on official leave during the conduct of the audit but she was present during the conduct of the cash count. The COA sent two demand letters dated October 3, 1996 (Exhibit C) and October 28, 1996 (Exhibit D) to accused Legrama, asking her to account for the shortage of the amount of Php1,152,900.75. As far as she knows, accused Legrama only made a partial restitution in the amount of Php60,000.00 under Official Receipt No. 970686 dated November 13, 1996, which she incorporated in her report. During cross-examination,8 she confirmed that the municipal treasurer was on leave when they conducted the audit and that she was only present when they conducted the cash count. When they informed accused Legrama regarding the shortage in the total amount of Php1,152,900.75, the latter admitted it. They disallowed the cash items because they were not properly documented nor properly funded. She doesnt
8
TSN, hearings of May 15, 16, 2000
know if the amount covered by these cash items was spent by the municipal government, and if they were indeed spent by the municipality, they were not taken up by the municipal treasurer as disbursement. accused Lonzanida admitted to them that She the likewise confirmed that during the exit conference, signatures appearing on the cash items were his own signatures. Despite the fact that accused Lonzanida admitted that he signed the cash items which were disallowed, they did not demand from the Mayor to return the amount. They disallowed the cash items because they do not bear the signature of the responsible officials in the municipality. If she were the treasurer, she would not have paid the amount covered by the cash item. It is the duty of the municipal accountant to see to it that vouchers are properly prepared before they are signed. PROSECUTIONS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE The prosecution filed its Formal Offer on September 12, 2000,9 consisting of the following documentary exhibits:
EXHIBITS A
DESCRIPTION Joint Affidavit dated July 7, 1997, of Virginia Bulalacao, Teresita Cayabyab and Lourdes Castillo of the COA.
PURPOSE Offered as part of testimony of Virginia Bulalacao and to confirm that they in fact conducted a special audit on the accounts of
Record, Vol. I, page 135.
1 folder entitled Special Cash Examination Report on the Cash and Accounts of Cecilia Legrama, Municipal Treasurer, San Antonio, Zambales dated October 1, 1996, consisting of 114 pages.
Cecilia Legrama. As part of testimony of Auditor Virginia Bulalacao that they submitted a report on the cash examination conducted on the accounts of Cecilia Legrama.
B-1
B-1-a
Memorandum dated January 3, 1997, to the Provincial Auditor, Iba, Zambales, consisting of 2 pages, part of Exhibit B, (pages 1&2 of Report) Name/signature of Elsa Paguinto as noted-(Provincial Auditor) Report of Cash Examination (front portion) dated Oct. 1, 1996 (page 7 of Report)
To show the results of the examination made which is embodied in the report. As part of testimony of Virginia Bulalacao that they forwarded their report to the Provincial Auditor. To show that the report was reviewed by the Assistant Provincial Auditor and team supervisor. Exhibits B-2 to B-2K are individually and collectively offered to show that a cash examination of the accounts of Cecilia Legrama was conducted by COA and the COA found a shortage in her accountability in the amount of
B-2
Php1,244,077.49. B-2-a Date Oct. 1, 1996 and name / signature of Virginia Bulalacao, front page. Dorsal portion of the Report of Cash Examination. Date Oct. 1, 1996 and name /signature of Virginia Bulalacao on the dorsal portion.
B-2-b B-2-c
That the cash items consisting of various sales invoice, various chits, vales and disbursement vouchers in the amount of Php 709,462.80, were disallowed. That Cecilia Legrama was informed of the conduct and result of the cash examination.
B-2-d
B-2-e
B-2-f
Amount Php 4,896,265.31 referring to the total debits to accountability. Amount of Php 3,652,187.82 referring to Credits to Accountability. Amount of Php 1,244,077.49 referring to the balance of accountability. Amount of Php 91,176.74 referring to the inventory of Cash and/or allowed cash items. Amount of Php 1,520,900.75
That the cash examination was part and parcel of the Special Audit examination conducted.
B-2-g
B-2-h
B-2-i B-2-j
B-2-k
B-3, B-3-a to B-3NN
referring to the total shortage of her accountability. Encircled portion sgd. Cecilia U. Legrama. Encircled portion indicated by words various sales invoices, various chits, vales and disbursement vouchers, under column inventory of cash items. Amount Php 709,462.80 indicating the total amount of various sales invoice, various chits and vales and disbursement vouchers. Pages 52 to 92 of Special Cash Examination Report (Exhibit B) consisting of the various vales, receipts and disbursement vouchers disallowed in audit.
Offered as part of testimony of Virginia Bulalacao that of the cash items submitted by Cecilia Legrama various vales, receipts and disbursement vouchers were disallowed in audit. That the cash advances reflected in the vales appearing on pages 53, 54,55,56,57,58,59, 60,62 and disbursement voucher on page 92, were acknowledged by Mayor Lonzanida
C-1
D, D-1
during the COA exit conference, and to show the amount reflected in the various cash items are to the account of accused Lonzanida. Demand letter C to D-1 are dated Oct. 3, 1996 offered as part of testimony of Virginia Bulalacao that after their audit and finding a shortage, they demanded from Cecilia Legrama the restitution of her shortage and to show that Cecilia Legrama acknowledged receipt of the said demand letters. Showing a shortage of Php289,022.75, and signature of Cecilia Legrama. Demand letter dated October 28, 1996, showing shortage of Php863,878.00 and signature of Cecilia Legrama. PAO Office No. 96- Offered to show 09 dated the official order as September 5, 1996 authority for the (inadvertenly COA team to marked as Exh. conduct an audit of C 5/16/00) the accounts of Cecilia Legrama.
Accused Legrama filed her Comment to Prosecutions Formal Offer of Exhibits,10 stating that she is not objecting to Exhibits A, B, B-1 and B-1-a, B-2, B-2-a to B-2k, B-3, B-3-a to B-3 - NN. In its Resolution dated October 11, 2000,11 the Court admitted the prosecutions Exhibits A to E, inclusive, with sub-markings, considering that the objections on Exhibits B-3, B-3-a to B-3-NN, probative value of the exhibits admissibility. DEFENSES TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE The two accused testified as follows: 1. Cecilia U. Legrama She was
12
refer more to the rather than their
Officer-in-Charge
of
the
Municipal
Treasurers Office of Zambales since 1989 and was appointed as Municipal Treasurer by accused Lonzanida in 1994. She released money based on the written request of the Mayor notwithstanding the fact that she knows that the procedure is irregular because accused Lonzanida scolds and gets mad at her if she doesnt release money. On other occasions, accused Lonzanida will send other persons to her to get money and she will
10 11
Ibid. at page 259. Ibid. at page 264. 12 TSN, hearings of November 20, 21, 2000, July 29, 30, 2003,.
release money because it has been ordered by the former. She is aware that she did not follow the usual procedures before releasing the money in favor of accused Lonzanida or of anybody whom he sends to get money from her. (She produced in open court various receipts, handwritten notes representing vales, chits or cash advances [Exhibits together with sub-markings], 1 to 72, inclusive, identified each receipt
one by one, based on which she released money in favor of accused Lonzanida or his representative). She likewise stated that the Exhibits l to 72 will prove that she actually released the money in favor of accused Lonzanida or his representative. She admitted that she paid the amounts covered by the various receipts and other documents marked as Exhibits 1 to 72, inclusive, and that the signatures appearing on the said documents were the actual signatures of the recipients appearing therein. She likewise released in favor of accused Lonzanida cash advances in the the separate height of amounts the of and Php160,000.00, Php96,000.00 Php25,000.00, during Php400,000.00
Pinatubo
eruption (Exhibits 1-NN-1). After the audit, a demand was made upon her by the COA instructing her to restitute the amount of Php1,152,900.75. She restituted the initial amount of Php60,000.00. She made further restitutions by paying
in cash and some amounts were taken from her salaries through salary deduction. She only has photocopies of the receipts evidencing her restitution because the originals of the said receipts are with her former lawyer who already died. She presented in court a Certification issued by the Municipal Accountant and Municipal Treasurer on April 11, 2002, stating that she restituted a total amount of Php832,390.40. Except for the initial amount of Php60,000.00, the restitution was made during the pendency of the instant case. She made the restitution because she was required by the COA and because she was ashamed that a case was filed against her. She paid her personal money because she wanted to show her accusers that she did not take anything from the government. The persons in favor of whom she released money were accused Lonzanida himself, employees of the municipal government and some private persons who were either scholars of the municipality or requesting for medical assistance. Another reason why she restituted was that she was not able to collect or recover the vales made by some municipal employees. She was about to prepare the liquidation voucher covering the vales but the COA Audit Team audited her account before she was able to do so.
She made releases of money in her favor but the same were for official travels. On cross-examination,13 she admitted that she
disbursed the funds involved in the instant case and that she did not make the proper disbursement vouchers despite her knowledge that there are procedures to be followed before the release of government money. She was not likewise able to prepare the liquidation vouchers covered by the vales and cash advances before the COA Team audited the municipalitys account. This holds true with the money that she got out of the funds of the municipality to defray her travel expenses for official travels. She failed to prepare the necessary disbursement vouchers for all her official travels. Her intention was to prepare one disbursement voucher for all these travels. She knew however that after every official travel, a public officer has to prepare a liquidating disbursement voucher and attach therewith the Certificate of Appearance and without this, the expense will be disallowed by the Commission on Audit. 2. ROMEO D. LONZANIDA14 He is the incumbent mayor of the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales. As a mayor, he does not have custody of the funds of the municipality. It is accused Legrama who has custody of the municipal funds as treasurer of the municipality.
13 14
TSN, hearing of September 16, 2003. TSN, hearing of January 24, 2005.
He initiated the audit made by the COA in 1996. He was not present at the time it was conducted since the State Auditors never required his presence. He was later informed by the State Auditors that based on their audit, accused Legrama had incurred shortages with regards to the management of funds of the municipality. He admitted that the notes requesting for cash advances (Exhibits B-3-A, B-3-B, B-3-C, B-3-F, B-3-G, B-3-H, B-3-J, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 ), were signed by him. These are legitimate expenses of the municipality and it has funds for the said expenses. He did not receive any amount from the cash advances he made. The said cash advances were for the constituents. He sent notes to accused Legrama to expedite the release of funds, because of the urgent need of his constituents like paying for hospital bills or educational assistance. It is not true that accused Legrama requested him to liquidate his alleged cash advances. He never scolded or got angry with accused Legrama or any of his employees. He never received any demand from the COA for an explanation on the shortages of the municipality. Neither did he receive a demand letter. He co-signed with accused Legrama for the release of the Internal Revenue Allotment in the amount of Php867,878.00 (Exhibit B-2-b), since it is a standard procedure in the municipality that he signs the check
together
with
the
Treasurer.
However,
it
is
the
Treasurer who disburses the funds in accordance with the programs for which the amount should be spent. Even if he is a co-signatory to the checks of the municipality, he does not have an obligation to account for the withdrawn amounts. On cross-examination15 he stated that he made urgent cash advances and it is up to the Treasurer to make the necessary liquidation/disbursement vouchers. He did not monitor whether the IOUs or vales were denied or granted by the Treasurer. money when the beneficiaries tell him. He has been the Mayor of the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales, for the last eighteen (18) years. As Mayor, he is very much aware that every disbursement of public funds must be covered by the corresponding disbursement voucher and that a municipal treasurer cannot disburse funds without it. He admitted that the manner of disbursement in the questioned transactions by the municipality was irregular because there were no covering disbursement vouchers, hence, they were disallowed by the Commission on Audit. He did not ask the treasurer to prepare the disbursement vouchers because it is part of her duty to prepare them. He doesnt know that accused Legrama was not preparing the disbursement voucher everytime he made a cash advance.
15
On some
occasions, he was only able to confirm the release of
He was likewise surprised
TSN, hearings of May 16, 17, 2005.
when he found out that there was no more money in the municipalitys coffers. request. Not all the amount involved in the instant case was released pursuant to his His requests merely covered the vales, payment for scholarship or for medical assistance. On re-direct examination,16 he testified that even if the request emanated from his office, the treasurer should first prepare the disbursement voucher before releasing the fund to the recipient as indicated in his request. He has only one staff who acts as his secretary and whose functions do not include the preparation of disbursement vouchers. It is not part of his duty to oversee all the disbursement vouchers or the preparation thereof because as mandated by law, it is incumbent upon the Treasurer to perform these functions. On re-cross examination, he reiterated that when he made several requests for cash advance as evidenced by the documentary exhibits which he admitted came from his office, he already presumed that the Treasurer will make the disbursement voucher before releasing the amount requested. He did not bother to check if the recipients received the amount because they personally go to him to tell him that they have already received the money. He confirmed that he did not sign any disbursement voucher notwithstanding the fact that he knows that any disbursement made by the
16
TSN, hearing of February 27, 2006.
Mayor should be signed and approved by the Mayor himself. DEFENSE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE The following: EXHIBITS 1 1-A 1-A-1 1-B DESCRIPTION Vale, dated June 5, 1996, in the amount of ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED PESOS (P1,700.00); Vale, dated May 29, 1996, in the amount of FOUR HUNDRED PESOS (P400.00); Signature of Romeo D. Lonzanida; Vale dated May 21,1996, in the amount of THREE HUNDRED PESOS (P300.00), for scholarship/financial assistance; Signature of Romeo D. Lonzanida; Signature of recipient; Vale dated May 21,1996, in the amount of FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (P500.00), for scholarship/financial assistance; Signature of Romeo D. Lonzanida; Signature of recipient Ma. Victoria Villano; Vale dated May 30,1996, in the amount of SIX HUNDRED PESOS (P600.00), for scholarship/financial assistance; Signature of recipient Cleopatra Arlegue; Signature of recipient Genevieve accused submitted the Formal Offer of
Documentary Exhibits on March 14, 2006,17 consisting of the
1-B-1 1-B-2 1-C
1-C-1 1-C-2 1-D
1-D-1 1-D-2
17
Ibid. at page 117.
1-E
1-E-1 1-E-2 1-F
1-F-1 1-F-2 1-G
1-G-1 1-H
1-I
1-I-1 1-J
1-K
1-K-1
Arlegue ; Vale dated May 30,1996, in the amount of FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (P500.00), for financial assistance of Mens Chorale Group to Spain; Paragraph containing the purpose of cash advance; Signature of recipient Rufina Cruz; Vale dated June 11,1996, in the total amount of FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY THREE PESOS (P553.00), for scholarship assistance; Signature of recipient Rosemarie Alipio; Signature of recipient Neil G. Ruelos; Vale dated July 25,1996, in the amount of THREE HUNDRED PESOS (P300.00), for food expenses of MDCC meeting; Signature of recipient Ms. Imelda Legrama, Sangguniang Bayan Clerk; Vale dated August 12, 1996, in the amount of THREE HUNDRED PESOS (P300.00), for assistance of Marivic Relioso, a student at YANGCO Electrician Institute; Cash advance dated August 12, 1996, for gasoline and motor oil in the amount of THREE HUNDRED PESOS (P300.00); Signature of recipient Mr. Medardo Domingo, In-Charge, Slaughter House, San Antonio, Zambales; Cash advance of Mayor Lonzanida in the amount of ONE THOUSAND PESOS (P1,000.00), for expenses incurred in connection with NDCC meeting at Rembrant Hotel, Quezon City; Cash advance, dated August 29, 1996, for the repair of motor vehicle in the amount of FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (P500.00); Signature of payee/recipient
1-L
1-L-1 1-L-2 1-L-3
1-L-4 PURPOSE :
Reynaldo Reotutar; Vale dated_ in the total amount of NINE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE PESOS (P925.00), for various expenses; The amount of TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00), for Mr. Gil Albino, driver, for fuel; The amount of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P150.00), for Mr. Rogelio Nacional, driver; The amount of FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (P500.00), for traveling expenses of Mr. Melchor Ventura, Public Information Officer; The amount of SEVENTY FIVE PESOS (P500.00), for traveling expenses of Mr. Reynaldo Reotutar; The above exhibits are being offered to prove that the foregoing amounts of vales/cash advances in the total sum of EIGHT THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED THREE PESOS (P8,403.00), were released by accused Legrama upon the orders/directive of Mayor Romeo Lonzanida and were in fact received by the recipients/ payees thereof; Sales Invoice No. 27160, dated June 27, 1996, in the amount of SEVEN HUNDRED SIXTY FIVE PESOS (P765.00); Sales Invoice , dated August 5, 1996, issued by Rex Motor Parts, in the amount of SIX THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY PESOS (P6,720.00), for the purchase of rotor blade and bolt with nuts; Official Receipts No. 166880 and 169298 issued by Caltex Service Station: One_ dated July 6, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS
1-M
1-N
1-O
1-P
1-Q
1-R
1-S
1-T
1-U
(P100.00) and the other, dated July 27, 1996, in the amount of EIGHTY FOUR PESOS (P84.00); Official Receipt No. 139347, dated July 29, 1996, issued by Fortunate Auto Supply in the amount SIX HUNDRED THIRTY NINE PESOS (P639.00), for engine part and supply; Official Receipt No. 169951, dated July 29, 1996, issued by Caltex Service Station in the amount of THREE HUNDRED TWELVE PESOS (P312.00) and Cash invoice No. 287948, dated July 31, 1996 issued by Don Florencio Caltex Service Station in the amount of ONE THOUSAND SEVENTY FIVE (P1,075.00); Cash Invoice No. 73356, dated August 2, 1996, issued by Petron Providence Service Station in the amount of FOUR HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE PESOS (P475.00); and Invoice No. 74041, dated August 4, 1996, in the amount of SIXTY FIVE PESOS (P65.00); Official Receipt No. 468 issued by JJ Automotive Shop, dated August 4, 1996, in the amount of EIGHT HUNDRED PESOS (P800.00); Caltex Service Station Official Receipts No. 201408 in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) and No. 201405 in the amount of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P150.00); Sales Invoice, dated August 5, 1996, issued by Rex Motor Parts, in the amount of SIX THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY PESOS (P6,720.00), for the purchase of rotor blade and bolt with nuts;
1-V
1-W
1-X
1-Y
1-Z
1-AAA
1-BB
Official Receipts No. 3260 issued by Rosenie Bonus Electrical and Battery Shop in the amount of ONE THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED PESOS (P1,600.00) in payment for 1_ 3 SM battery and No. 0601, dated August 8, 1996, issued by RG Studio in the amount of ONE HUNDRED TWENTY FIVE PESOS (P125.00); Caltex Service Station Official Receipt No. 201454 in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) for fuel/oil; Petron Providence Service Station Official Receipts No. 73445 August 9, 1996, in the amount of THREE HUNDRED PESOS (P300.00) and No. 73505, dated August 12, 1996 in the amount of TWO HUNDRED EIGHTY THREE PESOS (P283.00) for fuel; Caltex Service Station Official Receipts No. 201486, dated August 13, 1996, in the amount SEVENTY ONE PESOS AND NINETY CENTAVOS (P71.90) and No. 201561 dated August 14, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00); Caltex Service Station Official Receipts No. 201553, dated August 14, 1996, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00) and No. 201584 dated August 16, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) for fuel; Caltex Service Station Official Receipts No. 201593, dated August 16, 1996, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P250.00) and No. 201589 dated August 18, 1996, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00) for fuel; Caltex Service Station Official Receipts No. 201549, dated August
1-CC
1-DD
1-EE
1-FF
1-GG
1-HH
19, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) and No. 201542, dated August 19, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) for fuel; Petron RCCIs Station Official Receipts No. 4618 dated August 14, 1996 in the amount ONE HUNDRED NINETY PESOS (P190.00) and No.4766, dated August 20, 1996, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED THIRTY THREE PESOS (P233.00) for fuel; Petron Providence Service Station Cash Invoices No. 73807 dated August 21, 1996, in the amount ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) and No.73949, dated August 30, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) for diesel fuel; Caltex Service Station Official Receipts No. 202714, dated August 21, 1996, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P250.00) and No. 202752, dated August 24, 1996, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00) for diesel fuel; Caltex Service Station Official Receipts No. 202760, dated August 25, 1996, in the amount of THREE HUNDRED PESOS (P300.00) and No. 202761, dated August 25, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED TEN PESOS (P110.00) for diesel fuel; Caltex Service Station Official Receipts No. 202772, dated August 26, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) and No. 202783, dated August 26, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) for fuel; Caltex Service Station Official Receipts No. 202770, dated August
1-II
1-JJ
1-KK
1-LL
1-MM
26, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) and No. 202804, dated August 26, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P150.00) for diesel fuel; Caltex Service Station Official Receipts No. 202818, dated August 28, 1996, in the amount of SEVENTY TWO PESOS AND THIRTY CENTAVOS (P72.30) and No. 202850, dated August 31, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P150.00) for diesel fuel LY Felizmena Store Official Receipt No. 0354, dated August 28, 1996, in the amount TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THREE PESOS (P253.00) for supplies and Caltex Service Station Official Receipt No. 203269, dated September 12, 1996, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00) for diesel fuel; Petron Providence Service Station Official Receipt No. 74027 dated September 3, 1996, in the amount ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) and RCCI Station O.R No.05007, dated August 29, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00) both for fuel; Remy-Lita Store O.R No. 1991, dated August 13, 1996, in the amount of THIRTY PESOS (P30.00), for dust pan and Caltex Olongapo Service Station Cash Invoice No. 277538, dated August 31,1996, for diesel fuel in the amount of ONE HUNDRED PESOS (P100.00); Don Florencio Caltex Service Station O.R No. 262400, dated September 3, 1996, in the amount of ONE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P1,850.00), for various motor parts and supplies and O.R
PURPOSE:
1-OO 2 to 2-C PURPOSE:
3-A 3-B 4
No. 296994, dated August 12,1996, in the amount of NINETY PESOS (P90.00) for diesel fuel; The above exhibits 1 to 1-MM are being offered to prove that the above expenses in the total sum of TWENTY SIX THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY FOUR AND TWENTY CENTAVOS (P26,724.20), were necessary, legal and were incurred to defray the regular and normal expenses of the municipal government of San Antonio, Zambales, and were made upon the instructions/orders and directions of Mayor Lonzanida; (Same as Exh.1-NN); Affidavit of accused Cecilia U. Legrama, dated August 21, 1997; The foregoing affidavit is being offered to prove that the total amount of ONE MILLION ONE HUNDRED FIFTY TWO THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED PESOS (Php1,152,900.00), was released by accused Legrama upon orders, directives and instructions of Mayor Lonzanida and that the said amount was received by the payees/recipients thereof; Vale dated September 9, 1992, in the amount of THREE THOUSAND PESOS (P3,000.00), for purchase of sako or sack for sand bagging at the Bgy. Pundakit, San Antonio, Zambales flood; Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Signature of payee/ recipient Midardo Domingo, PIO, San Antonio, Zambales; Vale, dated September 3,1992, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00), for Kundiman Fiesta Souvenir Program;
4-A 4-B 5
5-A 6 6-A 6-B 7
7-A 8
8-A 8-B 9 9-A 10
10-A 10-B 11
Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Signature of payee/ recipient Anthony Domingo; Vale dated August 24, 1992, in the amount of THREE HUNDRED PESOS (P300.00), for hospitalization financial assistance of a resident of Bgy. Pundakit, San Antonio, Zambales; Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Vale dated August 31, 1992, in the amount of SEVEN HUNDRED PESOS (P700.00), as medical assistance; Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Signature of Ms. Felisa Savaria, payee/ recipient; Vale dated August 31, 1992, in the amount of THREE HUNDRED PESOS (P300.00), given to Mrs. Puzon as financial assistance; Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Vale dated September 1, 1992, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00), given to Ms. Jo Ann O. Velasco as financial assistance; Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Signature of payee/ recipient Jo Ann Velasco; Undated vale/cash advance in the amount of TWO HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P250.00); Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Vale dated November 20, 1992, in the amount of THREE HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P350.00), in payment of expenses of an ambulance of a patient; Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Signature of payee/ recipient Roel B. Apostol; Vale, undated, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P150.00),
11-A 12 12-A 12-B
13 13-A 14
14-A 14-B 15
15-A 16 16-A
17
for medical assistance to Mr. Cesar Aguillon of Bgy.San Antonio, Zambales; Signature of recipient/payee Ceasar Aguillon; Vale dated August 6, 1992 in the total amount of FIVE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED PESOS (P5,900.00); Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; The names Gil and Andy referring to Mr. Gil Antonio, driver, and Medardo Domingo, Market Supervisor, both of San Antonio, Zambales, who received the aforesaid amount of FIVE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED PESOS (P5,900.00), from accused Legrama; Vale,, dated August 17, 1992, in the amount of ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED PESOS (P1,700.00); Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Vale, undated, in the amount of TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (P2500.00), for rental of banca to Sitio Silangin , San Antonio, Zambales; Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Signature of payee/recipient Ernesto Lazaro; Cash advance, dated January 22, 1996, in the amount of EIGHT THOUSAND PESOS (P8,000.00), for the repair and conversion van; Signature of recipient/payee Noli Soriano, mechanic; Vale,dated February 14, 1996, in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND PESOS (P5,000.00), for the repair of car; Signature of Mayor Lonzanida, the payee/recipient of the said amount of FIVE THOUSAND PESOS (P5,000.00); Vale dated January 12, 1996, in the
17-A 18
18-A 19 19-A 20 20-A 21
21-A 22
23
23-A 24
amount of FIVE THOUSAND PESOS (P5,000.00), received by Ms. Emma Limon c/o Mayor Lonzanida; Signature of payee/recipient Emma Limon; Cash advance, undated, in the amount of ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (P1,500.00), received for dredging of canals of newly-opened road from San Esteban Elementary School to Provincial Road; Signature of payee Alex Merete, Bulldozer operator; Vale, dated February 22, 1996, in the amount of THREE HUNDRED PESOS (P300.00); Signature of payee, Mayor Lonzanida; Cash advance/vale, dated February 20, 1996, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00); Signature of Mayor Lonzanida and recipient/payee Ms. Lerma Sebastian ; Vale dated February 23, 1996, in the amount of ONE HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P150.00), for Marivic Dellosis as scholarship assistance; Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; Petron Providence Service Station O.R No. 74233 dated August 18, 1996 in the amount TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00), for gasoline; Vale, dated February 23, 1996, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00) obtained by Mayor Lonzanida; Signature of Mayor Lonzanida; C&C Burger, Mami House & Meat Food Store O.R No. 0632, dated May 11,1996, in the amount of FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY FIVE PESOS (P485.00);
25
26
27
28
30
31
32
33
C&C Burger, Mami House & Meat Food Store O.R No. 0627, dated June 8,1994 in the amount of ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P1200.00); NFG Merchandise O.R No. 0985, dated July 20, 1994, in the amount of ONE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED EIGHTY TWO PESOS AND FORTY CENTAVOS (P1,382.40); Retailer & Feeds Supply O.R No. 0901, dated July 15, 1991, in the amount of NINETEEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED PESOS (P19,800.00), for the 40 cavans of rice sold to Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; Simeon Tan Mini Mart O.R No. 84989, dated August 10, 1991, in the amount of NINETEEN THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED EIGHTY PESOS (P19,780.00), for the various grocery supplies sold to Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; Ram-Lian Variety O.R No. 0159, in the amount of NINETEEN THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED PESOS (P19,600.00), for various supplies sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; R.F Vista Enterprise O.R No. 1066, dated June 28, 1991, in the amount of EIGHTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED PESOS (P18,500.00), for 3,700 sacks to be used in sand bagging operation; Cariasos Store O.R No. 5729, dated August 17, 1991, in the amount of EIGHTEEN THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED NINETY FIVE PESOS (P18,195.00), for various supplies sold to Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; New Elite Construction Supply &
34
35
36
37 38 39
40
41
General Merchandise O.R No. 149, dated May 6, 1996, in the amount of SEVENTEEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED FIFTY FOUR PESOS (P17,954.00), for various supplies used in San Antonio Fiesta 96; New Elite Construction Supply & General Merchandise O.R No. 9918, dated May 6, 1996 in the amount of TWO THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED FORTY PESOS (P2,640.00), for various construction supplies sold to the Municipality of San Antonio for its Fiesta 96; Goodway Commercial O.R No. 29538, dated May 10, 1996, in the amount of FOUR HUNDRED FIFTY TWO PESOS AND SIXTY CENTAVOS (P452.60), for various construction materials; Dela Cruz Variety store O.R No. 0516, dated May 7, 1996, in the amount of FIVE HUNDRED FORTY THREE PESOS (P543.00) for various construction materials; Victory Liner Bus Fare Ticket in the amount of SEVENTY THREE PESOS (P73.00); Victory Liner Bus Fare Ticket in the amount of SEVENTY THREE PESOS (P73.00); Vale dated May 11, 1996, in the amount of THREE HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P350.00) for meals of 2 persons; O.R No. 18853, dated May 11, 1996, in the amount of FOUR THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED TWENTY EIGHT AND FIFTY CENTAVOS (P4,928.50), for various medical supplies; Liezels Hardware & Construction Supply O.R No. 26850, dated August
42
43
44
45
46
47
21, 1993, in the amount of ELEVEN THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED NINETY EIGHT PESOS (P11,298.00), for rental of equipment; R & V Construction Invoice No. 0200, dated November 12, 1992, in the amount of EIGHTEEN THOUSAND SIX HUNDRED TWENTY NINE AND NINETY THREE PESOS (P18,629.93), for various construction supplies sold to the Municipality of San Antonio for its Fiesta 96; Fontanares Sari-Sari O.R No. 1814, dated August 21, 1993, in the amount of ELEVEN THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED NINETY EIGHT PESOS (P11,298.00), for rental of equipment; New Peninsula Hardware and Lumber O.R No. 78520, dated September 14, 1993, in the amount of NINETEEN THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED PESOS (P19,400.00), for various tools sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; Big Foot Resturant and Rest House O.R No. 2275, dated June 17, 1996, for meals in the amount ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P1,200.00); Precy Sari-Sari Store O.R No. 0697, dated August 14, 1993, in the amount of NINETEEN THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED PESOS (P19,400.00), for various goods sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; LY Felizmena Store O.R No. 0657, dated July 20, 1991, in the amount of EIGHTEEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED EIGHTY FIVE PESOS
48
49
50
51
52
53
(P18,8850.00), for various goods sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; LY Felizmena Store O.R No. 0792, dated July 25, 1991, in the amount of NINETEEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED SEVENTY PESOS (P19,970.00), for various goods sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; Sales Invoice No. 4627, dated November 14, 1995, in the amount of NINE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED (P9,500.00), for various car supplies; Acknowledgment Receipt issued by Mr. Randy Villoso, dated July 31, 1992, in the amount ONE THOUSAND SIXTY PESOS (P1,060.00), as payment of service contract agreement to fix the water pump at the Slaughter House of San Antonio, Zambales; Laconsay & Son Repair Shop O.R No. 4468, dated August 10, 1995, in the amount of ONE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED PESOS (P1,300.00), as payment for the repair of garbage truck; Juberts Light & Sounds Invoice No. 0438, dated June 12, 1991 in the amount of ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P1,200.00), as payment for rental of sound used by the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales, in the Independence Day Celebration; Laconsay & Son Repair Shop O.R No. 4484, dated November 19, 1995, in the amount of TWO THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED PESOS (P2,800.00), for the repair of the municipalitys pick up trucks clutch, brake parts replacement;
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
Delys Store O.R No. 0567, dated June 13, 1995, in the amount of ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FORTY PESOS (P1,740.00), for snacks sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; Laconsay & Son Repair Shop O.R No. 4480, dated October 19, 1995, in the amount of TWO THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED PESOS (P2,400.00), for the repair of the municipalitys jeep radiator and brake replacement parts; Delys Store O.R No. 0572, dated June 26, 1995, in the amount of ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED FORTY PESOS (P1,740.00), for merienda sold to the municipality of San Antonio, Zambales, during the meeting with the Barangay Captains; Delys Store O.R No. 0582, dated August 18, 1995, in the amount of FIVE HUNDRED EIGHTY PESOS (P580.00), for the lunch of 5 persons of DTI personnel sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; Delys Store O.R No. 0582, dated Sept. 21, 1995, in the amount ONE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED SIXTY PESOS (P1,860.00), for snacks sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; Roneil Calibration O.R No. 000991, dated January 25, 1996, in the amount of SEVEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED FOURTEEN PESOS AND TWENTY FOUR CENTAVOS (P7,914.24), for various supplies sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; Fortunate Auto Supply O.R No. 135675, dated March 5, 1996, in the
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
amount of FOUR HUNDRED SIXTEEN PESOS (P416.00), for various supplies; LCS Auto Supply O.R No. 2388, dated March 6, 1996, in the amount of ONE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P1,200.00), for various supplies; Friction Brake & Clutch Center Quotation Sheet No. 0489, dated March 1, 1996, in the amount of TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P200.00), for various car equipment sold to the municipality; Eastown Auto Supply O.R No. 312989, dated March 4, 1996, in the amount of ONE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P1,950.00), for various car parts; Rose Fast Food & Refreshment O.R No. 0124, dated November 22, 1995, in the amount of SIX HUNDRED FIFTY NINE PESOS (P659.00), for snacks sold to Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; Goodway Commercial O.R No. 34141, dated December 11, 1996, in the amount of SIX HUNDRED PESOS (P600.00), for various construction materials ; Garbes-Dizon Servitek O.R No. 01519, dated January 5, 1996, in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY PESOS AND FORTY CENTAVOS (P5,270.40), for various equipment sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; Garbes-Dizon Servitek O.R No. 1520, dated January 5, 1996, in the amount of FIVE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED EIGHTEEN PESOS (P5,718.00), for various equipment
PURPOSE:
68
69
PURPOSE:
72
sold to the Municipality of San Antonio, Zambales; The foregoing exhibits 3 to 67 are being offered to prove that the expenses in the total sum of THREE HUNDRED SIXTY SIX THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED NINETY NINE PESOS AND TWENTY SEVEN PESOS (P366,999.27), were necessary, legal and were incurred to defray the regular and normal expenses of the municipal government of San Antonio, Zambales, and were made upon the instructions/orders/directions of Mayor Lonzanida; Time Book and Payroll covering the period November 18, 1992 to November 27, 1992, in the amount of NINE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P9,200.00), for the construction of New B & G Comfort Room at Pandakit Elementary School of San Antonio, Zambales; Summary of Payrolls covering the period November 18-27, 1992, in the amount of NINE THOUSAND TWO HUNDRED PESOS (P9,200.00); The foregoing exhibits 3 to 67 are being offered to prove that the expenses in the total sum of TWELVE THOUSAND THREE HUNDRED FIFTY PESOS (P12,350.00) were released and paid by accused Legrama for a valid legal purpose; Request for obligation and Allotment in the amount of NINE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TWO PESOS AND SEVENTY FIVE CENTAVOS (P9,772.75) for Cecilia Legramas transportation and expenses and per diems, dated September 11, 1996;
72-A
72-B
72-B-1 72-C
72-D
72-E
72-E-1
Amount of NINE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTY TWO PESOS AND SEVENTY FIVE CENTAVOS (P9,772.75); Itinerary of Travel of Cecilia Legrama covering the period May 3 to September 4, 1996, in the total amount of NINE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTY TWO PESOS AND SEVENTY FIVE CENTAVOS (P9,772.75); Signature of Mayor Lonzanida approving the said itinerary travel; Amount of NINE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTY TWO PESOS AND SEVENTY FIVE CENTAVOS (P9,772.75), on the said itinerary of travel; Certificate of Appearance, dated September 4, 1996, issued by Raquel G. Esguerra of the Land Bank of the Philippines; Certificate of Appearance, dated June 11, 1996, issued by Mr. Irineo E. Onia, Provincial Treasurer, Cabangan, Province of Zambales; and Signature of Mr. Onia.
The prosecution filed its Comment,18 on March 31, 2006, interposing no objection to the accuseds Exhibits 1 to 72, inclusive, with sub-markings. The Court, in its Resolution dated April 21, 2006,19 admitted the accuseds Exhibits 1 to 72, inclusive, in view of the fact that the prosecution did not interpose any objection thereto. With the admission of the accuseds exhibit, they are deemed to have rested their case.
18 19
Ibid. at page 296. Ibid. at page 301.
Accused Legrama filed her Memorandum on June June 26, 2006.21
5,
2006,20 while accused Lonzanida filed his Memorandum on
After a careful study and evaluation of the evidence presented in this case, this Court finds the accused Cecilia U. Legrama guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of malversation of public funds. The same conclusion was not arrived at in the case of accused Romeo D. Lonzanida considering that there was no evidence presented to prove that he conspired with accused Legrama in committing the crime charged. The crime of malversation of public funds is defined and penalized under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code, viz: ART. 217. Malversation of public funds or property. Presumption of malversation. Any public officer who, by reason of the duties of his office, is accountable for public funds or property, shall appropriate the same, or shall take or misappropriate or shall consent, or through abandonment or negligence, shall permit any other person to take such public funds or property, wholly or partially, or shall otherwise be guilty of the misappropriation of malversation of such funds or property, shall suffer: xxx xxx xxx
The failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or property with which he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly authorized officer, shall be prima facie evidence that he has put such missing fund or property to personal uses.
20 21
Ibid. at page 308. Ibid. at page 360.
The elements essential for the conviction of an accused under the above penal provision are: 1. 2. 3. 4. That the offender is a public officer; That he has the custody or control of funds or That the funds or property are public funds or That he appropriated, took, misappropriated or
property by reason of the duties of his office; property for which he is accountable; and consented or through abandonment or negligence, permitted another person to take them. First Element. The presence of this element is
undisputed, both accused in the instant case are public officers, Lonzanida being a mayor and accused Legrama, being a treasurer, at the time material to this case. Second Element. The presence of this element holds true with respect to accused Legrama. It is inherent in the function of accused Legrama, as treasurer of the municipality, that she has possession or custody of local government funds. The Local Government Code is explicit that the treasurer takes custody of and exercise proper management of the funds of the local government unit concerned. This is embodied in Section 470 thereof which states that:
SECTION 470. Appointment, Qualifications, Powers, and Duties. X x x.
(d) The treasurer shall take charge of the treasury office, perform the duties provided for under Book II of this Code, and shall:
Decision/Criminal Case No. 25204 People vs. Lonzanida and Legrama Page -39----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(1) Advise the governor or mayor, as the case may be, the sanggunian, and other local government and national officials concerned regarding disposition of local government funds, and on such other matters relative to public finance; (2) Take custody of and exercise proper management of the funds of the local government unit concerned; (3) Take charge of the disbursement of all local government funds and such other funds the custody of which may be entrusted to him by law or other competent authority; (4) Inspect private commercial and industrial establishments within the jurisdiction of the local government unit concerned in relation to the implementation of tax ordinances, pursuant to the provisions under Book II of this Code; (5) Maintain and update the tax information system of the local government unit; (6) In the case of the provincial treasurer, exercise technical supervision over all treasury offices of component cities and municipalities; and (e) Exercise such other powers and perform such other duties and functions as may be prescribed by law or ordinance.
Third Element. The parties have stipulated during the pretrial of this case that the amount of Php1,152,900.75 is public fund.22 As to who is accountable for the said public fund, Section 340 of the Local Government Code clearly provides that:
SECTION 340. Persons Accountable for Local Government Funds. Any officer of the local government unit whose duty permits or requires the possession or custody of local government funds shall be accountable and responsible for the safekeeping thereof in conformity with the provisions of this Title. Other local officers who, though not accountable by the nature of their duties, may likewise be similarly held accountable and responsible for local government funds through their participation in the use or application thereof.
Based on the afore-quoted provision of law, accused Legrama, as the treasurer of the municipality, is accountable for the public fund involved in the instant case, in the amount of Php1,152,900.75. Fourth Element. The prosecution failed to adduce
evidence that accused Lonzanida and Legrama, conspired by

22
Record, Vol. I, page 57.
misappropriating and converting to their personal use and benefit, the amount of Php1,152,900.75. The established facts as adduced by the evidence of the prosecution are as follows: In a Memorandum dated January 3, 1997 (Exhibit B-1), signed by prosecution witness, COA State Auditor I Virginia D. Bulalacao, it appears that pursuant to Office Order No. 96-09 dated September 6, 1996, an audit was conducted on the financial transactions covering the period from June 24, 1996 to September 4, 1996 of the Municipality of San Antonio. After the said audit, the COA prepared the Special Cash Examination Report on the Cash and Accounts of Ma. Cecilia Legrama, dated October 1, 1996 (Exhibit B), which contained the findings that accused Legramas cash accountability was short by Php289,022.75 and there was an unaccounted Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA) in the amount of Php863,878.00, thereby showing a total shortage of Php1,152,900.75. Included in this shortage is the amount of Php709,462.80, representing the total amount of sales invoices, chits, vales documents. This Court has scrutinized each and every sales invoice, chit, vale and the disbursement voucher (Exhibits B-3 to B-3NN), follows: comprising the disallowed amount of Php709,462.80, and found that they are broken down as various and disbursement vouchers,
which were disallowed in audit due to lack of supporting
Various receipts and invoices in Php13,771.30 the name of the Municipality of San Antonio Various notes for cash advance 7,471.50 c/o accused Lonzanida Various receipts for gasoline 6,862.90 and other fuel supplies Disbursement Voucher with all 160,000.00 the entries handwritten by 25,000.00 accused Legrama, containing 400,000.00 only the following: 1. the name 96,000.00 Romeo D. Lonzanida in the box for Name and Address of Claimant, 2. the signature of accused Lonzanida above the words Name, Signature and Address of Claimant and 3. the four amounts under the heading Cash Advance. TOTAL Php709,105.70 The Supreme Court has repeatedly said that when the absence of funds is not due to the personal use thereof by the accused, the presumption of malversation is completely destroyed; in fact, the presumption is deemed never to have existed at all.23 In the instant case, accused Legrama confirmed that she released cash advance in the total amount of Php7,471.50, pursuant to the handwritten requests of accused Lonzanida, because she knew the same was for the constituents24 or for emergency purpose25 and that her intention was to prepare the liquidation papers later.26 indicated
23
The evidence likewise show the scholars of the
that the said cash advances were received by the payees therein, which include
Milagros L. Diaz, January 26, 1999, G.R. No. 125213, January 26, 1999; Felix Villacorta vs. People of the Philippines and Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-68268, November 12, 1986; Arturo Quizo vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-77120, April 6, 1987. 24 TSN, hearing of September 16, 2003, page 19. 25 Ibid. at page 20. 26 Ibid. at page 19.
municipality or residents asking for medical assistance.
The
amounts of Php13,771.30 and Php6,862.90, were used by the municipality for various purposes, but were merely disallowed in audit due to lack of supporting documents. Conceding that these amounts were allowable after due accomplishment of proper documents, their total amount of Php21,105.70, should be deducted from the total shortage of accused Legrama. This Court cannot, however, arrive at the same finding with respect to the total amount of Php681,000.00, contained in the Disbursement Voucher (Exhibit B-3-NN). When accused Legrama testified in open court and was asked to explain the said disbursement voucher, declared as follows: she
Q: Madam Witness, during the court hearing last November 21, 2000 you presented the document entitled Disbursement Voucher which was marked as Exhibit 1-NN, please go over this document and explain to the Honorable Court what are these entries about? There are entries in this document, please explain what is this cash advance 160,000.00? A: This is a disbursement voucher for Mr. Romeo Lonzanida and the entries of the cash advances are for 160,000, 25,000, 400,000 and 96,000. These were the cash advances given to Mayor Lonzanida during the height of the Pinatubo eruption. That was when the municipal building was destroyed already and we could not properly document all these documents. The total of this is 681,000 which was given four (4) times separately maam.27
(Underscoring supplied.)
This Court takes judicial notice that the Mt. Pinatubo erupted in June, 1991, and has not erupted again up to the present. As stated earlier, the COA audit conducted on the account of accused Legrama covers the financial transactions of the municipality from June 24, 1996 to
27
TSN, hearing of July 9, 2001, page 3.
September 4, 1996.
Therefore, the said cash advances,
which accused Legrama confirmed were given to accused Lonzanida during the height of the Mt. Pinatubo eruption, which occurred five years before the subject audit, are not expenses of the municipality during the period of audit covered in the instant case. As it is, it has been disallowed by the COA for lack of necessary supporting papers. Even if the said disbursement voucher had been completely accomplished and granting that all the necessary supporting documents had been attached thereto, it would nonetheless be disallowed because it covers a transaction which is not subject of the audit. Having considered that the total amount of Php21,105.70, as deductible from the total amount of shortage of accused Legrama for the reasons hereinabove described, the total shortage is now reduced to the amount of Php1,131,795.05. Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code provides that The failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or property with which he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly authorized officer, shall be prima facie evidence that he has put such missing fund or property to personal uses. The prima facie presumption that an accused has put such missing funds to personal use is, of course, rebuttable. Accordingly, if the accused is able to present adequate evidence that can nullify any likelihood that he had put the funds or property to personal use, then that presumption
would be at an end and the prima facie case is effectively negated.28 In the instant case, the COA sent to accused Legrama, two letters of demand dated October 3 and 28, 1996 (Exhibits C and D, respectively), informing her of the shortage on her account and requiring her to produce immediately the missing funds and submit within seventy-two (72) hours a written explanation why this shortage occurred. The prosecution having established that accused Legrama incurred a shortage of Php1,131,795.05 and that she failed to produce it upon demand, there is a prima facie presumption that she has put such missing funds to personal use and it becomes incumbent upon her to destroy the said presumption. In her defense, accused Legrama testified that except for the expenses she incurred for her official travels, she did not put the amount involved in the instant case to personal use.29 As proof of her claim, she produced and painstakingly identified in open court each and every sales invoice, chit, vale and the disbursement voucher which are likewise the evidence of the prosecution marked as Exhibits B-3 to B3NN (Exhibits 1 to 1-NN) and in addition, presented various sales invoice, chit and vale form marked as Exhibits 3 to 72, all in the total amount of Php1,169,099.62, an amount indictment. more than what is involved in the instant
28 29
Diaz vs. Sandiganbayan, supra. TSN, hearing of July 9, 2001.
This Court has assiduously gone over each and every evidence submitted by accused Legrama and found that except for the Official Receipt dated August 18, 1996, in the amount of Php200.00, issued in the name of the Municipality of San Antonio for the purchase of gasoline (Exhibit 22), accused Legramas evidence marked as Exhibits 3 to 21 and 23 to 72, inclusive, bear various dates which are not subject of the COA audit. For the reasons afore-discussed, considering that the said amount of Php200.00 was clearly not for the personal use of accused Legrama, the same should likewise be deducted from her shortage, thereby the said shortage is now reduced to Php1,131,595.05.
To reiterate, the subject of the audit from which the instant case stemmed from are financial transactions of the municipality from June 24, 1996 to September 4, 1996. Therefore, official receipts, chits or vales, even if they are in the name of the municipality, but nonetheless issued to it for transactions as far back as the year 1991 are immaterial to the instant case. It is sad and even deplorable that accused from liability, Legrama, in an attempt to extricate herself
tried to deceive this Court in this manner. Having obtained a degree in Bachelor of Science Major in Accounting and being a municipal treasurer for eight (8) years,30 accused Legrama is presumed to be aware that she knowingly attempted to deceive this Court. In the crime of malversation, all that is necessary for conviction is proof that the accountable officer had received the public funds and that he did not have them in his
30
TSN, hearing of September 16, 2003, page 6.
possession when demand therefor was made and he could not satisfactorily explain his failure so to account. even if there is no direct evidence of An accountable public officer may be convicted for malversation personal misappropriation, where he has not been able to explain satisfactorily the absence of the public funds involved.31 In the case at bar, accused Legrama failed to properly explain or justify the shortage in her accountability. By her failure to offer competent and credible evidence, she utterly failed to rebut the prima facie presumption of malversation, hence, her presumed innocence must yield to the finding that her conviction for malversation is warranted in the case at bar. It may be worthy to note that accused Legrama admitted that she made partial restitution of her shortage. Supreme Court has time and again recognized The that
restitution of the cash shortage is an implied admission of misappropriation of the missing funds or a clear offer of compromise which must be treated as an implied admission of guilt.32 Coming now to accused Lonzanida, the information alleges that he connived and conspired with accused Legrama in taking, misappropriating and converting to their personal use and benefit the amount involved in the instant case. Article 8 of the Revised Penal Code defines conspiracy. It states that A conspiracy exists when two or more persons
31
Rene P. Pondevida vs. Sandiganbayan, et al., G.R. Nos. 160929-31, August 16, 2005; Lucilyn T. Zambrano vs. Sandiganbayan and the People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 82067, April 10, 1992; Felix H. Cabello vs. Sandiganbayan and the People, G.R. No. 93885, May 14, 1991. 32 Conrado C. Doldol vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. Nos. 164481, September 20, 2005.
come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. Conspiracy is present when one concurs with the criminal design of another, indicated by the performance of an overt act leading to the crime committed. To establish conspiracy, direct proof of an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and the decision to commit it is not necessary. It may be inferred from the acts of the accused before, during or after the commission of the crime which, when taken together, would be enough to reveal a community of criminal design, as the proof of conspiracy is perhaps most frequently made by evidence of a chain of circumstances. Once established, all the conspirators are criminally liable as co-principals regardless of the degree of participation of each of them, for in contemplation of the law the act of one is the act of all.
33
Unfortunately in the case at bar, there is a dearth of evidence from which it can be inferred, much more convince this Court that the two accused conspired in misappropriating public funds. There is no chain of
circumstances whatsoever from which this Court might derive a finding of conspiracy between the two accused. Conspiracy must be shown to exist as clearly and The convincingly as the commission of the offense itself and the burden to establish this rests on the prosecution.34 prosecution, having failed to introduce any evidence of complicity between the two accused in committing the
33 34
Jaime H. Domingo vs. Sandiganbayan, et al., G.R. Nos. 149175, October 25, 2005. People of the Philippines vs. Rolando Dagani, G.R. No. 153875, August 16, 2006.
instant crime charged, this Court has no other choice but to uphold the presumption of innocence of accused Lonzanida. WHEREFORE, premises considered, for failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt, accused ROMEO D. LONZANIDA, is hereby acquitted of the instant crime charged. The Hold Departure Order issued against him is hereby ordered lifted. The cash bond which he posted to obtain his provisional liberty is hereby ordered returned to him subject to the usual auditing and accounting procedures. Accused CECILIA U. LEGRAMA is hereby declared guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Malversation of Public Funds. The amount involved in the instant case is more than Php22,000.00. Hence, pursuant to the provisions of Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty to be imposed is reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua. Considering the absence of any aggravating circumstance and the presence of two mitigating circumstances, viz, accused Legramas voluntary surrender and partial restitution of the amount involved in the instant case, and being entitled to the provisions of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, she is hereby sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty of 4 years, 2 months and 1 day of
prision correccional, as minimum, to 10 years and 1 day of prision mayor, as maximum. Further, she is ordered to pay the amount of
Php299,204.65, representing the balance of her incurred shortage after deducting therein the restituted amount of Php832,390.40 and the Php200.00 covered by an Official Receipt dated August 18, 1996 issued in the name of the Municipality of San Antonio (Exhibit 22). She is also ordered to pay a fine equal to the amount malversed which is Php1,131,595.05 and likewise suffer the penalty of perpetual special disqualification and to pay the costs.35 SO ORDERED.
MA. CRISTINA G. CORTEZ-ESTRADA

Chairman
WE CONCUR:
ROLAND B. JURADO BALDOS

Associate Justice Associate Justice
TERESITA V. DIAZ-
ATTESTATION
35
Art. 41, Rev. Penal Code
Decision/Criminal Case No. 25204 People vs. Lonzanida and Legrama Page -50----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I attest that the conclusions in the above-decision were reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Courts Division.
MA. CRISTINA G. CORTEZ-ESTRADA

Chairman, Fifth Division
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 13 of the Constitution, and the Division Chairmans Attestation, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the above decision were reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Courts Division.
TERESITA V. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO

Presiding Justice

A Crim 25204 Lonzanida 01 30 2007

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Crim 25204 Lonzanida 01 30 2007

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES Sandiganbayan

Quezon City ------Fifth Division

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Pl aintiff, - versus -

Criminal Case No. 25204

Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.

TSN, hearing of September 13, 14, 1999,

also affirmed his signatures appearing on the cash

TSN, hearings of May 15, 16, 2000

Record, Vol. I, page 135.

B-3, B-3-a to B-3NN

refer more to the rather than their

occasions, he was only able to confirm the release of

He was likewise surprised

TSN, hearings of May 16, 17, 2005.

TSN, hearing of February 27, 2006.

Documentary Exhibits on March 14, 2006,17 consisting of the

1-B-1 1-B-2 1-C

1-C-1 1-C-2 1-D

Ibid. at page 117.

1-E-1 1-E-2 1-F

1-F-1 1-F-2 1-G

1-L-1 1-L-2 1-L-3

1-OO 2 to 2-C PURPOSE:

5-A 6 6-A 6-B 7

8-A 8-B 9 9-A 10

11-A 12 12-A 12-B

18-A 19 19-A 20 20-A 21

Ibid. at page 296. Ibid. at page 301.

Accused Legrama filed her Memorandum on June June 26, 2006.21

2006,20 while accused Lonzanida filed his Memorandum on

Ibid. at page 308. Ibid. at page 360.

evidence that accused Lonzanida and Legrama, conspired by

Record, Vol. I, page 57.

which were disallowed in audit due to lack of supporting

The evidence likewise show the scholars of the

municipality or residents asking for medical assistance.

TSN, hearing of July 9, 2001, page 3.

Therefore, the said cash advances,

Diaz vs. Sandiganbayan, supra. TSN, hearing of July 9, 2001.

TSN, hearing of September 16, 2003, page 6.

MA. CRISTINA G. CORTEZ-ESTRADA

ROLAND B. JURADO BALDOS

Art. 41, Rev. Penal Code

MA. CRISTINA G. CORTEZ-ESTRADA

TERESITA V. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO

You might also like