Title
Albello vs. Galvez
Case
Adm. Matter No. P-01-1476
Decision Date
Jan 16, 2003
A sheriff was suspended for one year without pay after being found guilty of dishonesty and gross misconduct for soliciting and receiving money from a complainant in a property dispute case.
Font Size:

Case Digest (Adm. Matter No. P-01-1476)

Facts:

  1. Case Background:

    • The case originated from Civil Case No. 3941, Bienvinida Atun-Banzuela, et al. vs. Rommel Albello, for forcible entry involving a parcel of land in Legazpi City, Albay, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. 47499.
    • On October 23, 1992, the trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, ordering Rommel Albello to vacate the premises, pay reasonable rentals, attorney’s fees, and costs.
  2. Execution and Demolition Motion:

    • After the decision became final, a writ of execution was issued, and respondent Sheriff Jose Galvez reported that Rommel Albello had vacated the premises.
    • A motion for demolition was filed by the plaintiffs but was later withdrawn when the parties agreed to await the outcome of Civil Case No. 8804 (Wilfredo A. Albello, et al. vs. Bienvinida Atun-Banzuela), a quieting of title case involving the same property.
    • On July 13, 1994, the trial court ordered the padlocking of the main door of the residential house, with one set of keys to be held by the sheriff and the other by the plaintiffs.
  3. Complaint Against Sheriff:

    • On October 15, 1999, Emma Albello, Rommel Albello’s wife, filed a complaint against Sheriff Galvez, alleging that he demanded and received P3,000 from her mother-in-law, Salve Albello, with the assurance that he would facilitate access to the padlocked property.
    • The Office of the Deputy Ombudsman dismissed the complaint, but the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) took up the case.
  4. Respondent’s Defense:

    • Sheriff Galvez admitted receiving P3,000 but claimed it was for attorney’s fees intended for Atty. Caesar Daep, who later refused the case. He returned the money, but Salve Albello denied receiving it.
  5. Investigation Findings:

    • Executive Judge Raymund Jacob found the complainant’s version more credible, noting that Sheriff Galvez received a total of P4,000 from the Albello family under questionable circumstances.
    • Judge Jacob concluded that Sheriff Galvez’s actions constituted dishonesty, gross misconduct, and acts unbecoming of a court employee.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • (Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Dishonesty and Gross Misconduct:

    • Sheriff Galvez’s admission of receiving money from the complainant and her mother-in-law, coupled with his failure to provide credible evidence to support his defense, established his dishonesty and gross misconduct.
    • His actions were incompatible with his role as a court officer and undermined public trust in the judiciary.
  2. Penalty Justification:

    • While the charges would ordinarily warrant dismissal, the Court considered Sheriff Galvez’s 30 years of service and the fact that this was his first offense.
    • The penalty of one-year suspension without pay was deemed appropriate, with a stern warning against future infractions.
  3. Integrity of Court Personnel:

    • The Court emphasized that court employees, especially sheriffs, must uphold the highest standards of integrity and avoid any conduct that could erode public confidence in 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.