Title
Abdulwahid vs. Reyes
Case
A.M. No. P-902, 926
Decision Date
Jan 31, 1978
Deputy sheriff Efren B. Reyes dismissed for unauthorized absences, misappropriation of funds, and failure to perform duties, undermining public trust in the judiciary.
Font Size:

Case Digest (A.M. No. P-902, 926)

Facts:

Background and Parties Involved

  • Complainant: Hakim S. Abdulwahid, Clerk of Court and Ex-Officio City Sheriff of the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga City.
  • Respondent: Efren B. Reyes, Deputy Sheriff of the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga City.
  • The respondent is charged with "Misconduct, Dishonesty, and Neglect of Duty" in Administrative Matter No. P-926 and "Serious Misconduct" in Administrative Matter No. P-902.

Administrative Matter No. P-926

  1. Unauthorized Absence

    • Respondent absented himself from office from July 2, 1974, to July 27, 1974, without filing a leave application or notifying the office. He later filed a sick leave application on July 22, 1974, supported by a medical certificate from his uncle, Dr. Tomas Ferrer. Witnesses testified that he was seen downtown during this period, casting doubt on his claimed illness.
  2. Failure to Return Deposit

    • Respondent received P1,500.00 from Sikatuna Fishing Corporation as a deposit for expenses related to a writ of preliminary attachment. Despite no need for attachment, he failed to return the amount until July 15, 1974, after the complaint was filed.
  3. Misappropriation of Funds

    • Respondent received P150.00 from Atty. Alejandro Saavedra for sheriff's fees and transportation expenses but only deposited P60.00. He claimed the remaining P90.00 was to be collected later, but no official receipt was issued.
  4. Failure to Turn Over Funds

    • Respondent failed to turn over P50.00 out of P350.00 entrusted to him by Mrs. Erlinda Infante for delivery to Jackel Principel. The amount was later returned after the complaint was filed.
  5. Failure to Make Returns

    • Respondent failed to make returns to the court of origin after serving summons and writs of execution, violating Circular No. 35, which requires returns within three days.
  6. Failure to Serve Summons

    • Respondent failed to serve several summons and did not make returns to the court of origin as required by law.

Administrative Matter No. P-902

  • Respondent failed to remit P1,136.41 collected from judgment debtors in Civil Case No. 224138 of the City Court of Manila, despite repeated demands from Metro Drug Corporation. He admitted receiving the amount but claimed it was paid to the corporation, which was proven false.

Issue:

  1. Whether respondent is guilty of misconduct, dishonesty, and neglect of duty in Administrative Matter No. P-926.
  2. Whether respondent is guilty of serious misconduct in Administrative Matter No. P-902.
  3. Whether the respondent’s actions warrant dismissal from service.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court found respondent Efren B. Reyes guilty of serious misconduct in both cases. He was ordered dismissed from service effective February 21, 1975, the date he began his unauthorized absence.

Ratio:

  1. Misconduct and Dishonesty

    • Respondent’s actions, including unauthorized absences, misappropriation of funds, and failure to perform his duties, constitute serious misconduct and dishonesty. His excuses, such as pressure of work, were deemed insufficient to justify his negligence.
  2. Recidivism

    • Respondent’s repeated offenses, including misappropriation of funds and failure to remit collected amounts, demonstrate a pattern of dishonesty and neglect of duty. His actions while facing similar charges in another administrative case further aggravated his misconduct.
  3. Public Trust

    • As a public officer, respondent’s actions undermined public trust in the judiciary. His failure to perform his duties and misuse of funds warranted severe disciplinary action.
  4. Substantial Evidence

    • The findings of the investigating judge were supported by substantial evidence, including receipts, testimonies, and admissions by the respondent. His failure to present evidence in his defense further strengthened the case against him.
  5. Dismissal as Appropriate Penalty

    • Given the gravity of the offenses and the respondent’s incorrigible behavior, dismissal from service was deemed appropriate to uphold the integrity of the judiciary.


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.