Title
Ang vs. Vda. de Blas
Case
A.M. No. P-91-602
Decision Date
Oct 15, 1991
A court staff member was dismissed for grave misconduct and dishonesty after failing to secure bail despite accepting money, and ignoring directives to explain her actions.
Font Size:

Case Digest (A.M. No. P-91-602)

Facts:

  1. Complaint Initiation:

    • Araceli M. Agustin, mother of an accused (Melchor Agustin), sent an unsworn letter-complaint to Judge Emmanuel T. Leyno of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Guimba, Nueva Ecija, on April 24, 1991.
    • The complaint alleged that Teresita Garampil Vda. de Blas, a Staff Assistant II in the same court, committed grave misconduct.
  2. Allegations Against Respondent:

    • On March 25, 1991, Mrs. Blas went to the restaurant of Araceli Agustin and demanded P850.00, claiming it was needed to secure a personal bail bond for Melchor Agustin’s provisional liberty.
    • Despite receiving the money, Mrs. Blas failed to secure the bail bond, leaving Melchor Agustin in jail.
    • Mrs. Blas allegedly persuaded the warrant officer, PFC Bernardo de Guzman, to delay the arrest of Melchor Agustin until she could raise sufficient funds.
  3. Failure to Respond:

    • Judge Leyno issued a memorandum on April 24, 1991, directing Mrs. Blas to explain her actions within 72 hours. She received the memorandum on April 25, 1991, but failed to respond.
    • Executive Judge Raymundo Z. Annang also issued a 4th Indorsement on May 15, 1991, requiring Mrs. Blas to comment or explain within five days. Again, she failed to respond.
  4. Recommendation for Disciplinary Action:

    • Judge Annang, in a letter dated June 17, 1991, recommended that Mrs. Blas be suspended for two months without pay for gross misconduct.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • (Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Admission by Silence:

    • Mrs. Blas’s failure to respond to the memoranda and indorsements was deemed a waiver of her right to be heard and an admission of the charges against her.
  2. Violation of Public Trust:

    • As a court employee, Mrs. Blas was expected to uphold the highest standards of integrity, honesty, and accountability. Her actions violated these principles and eroded public trust in the judiciary.
  3. Precedent on Judicial Conduct:

    • The Court reiterated that all judiciary personnel, from judges to clerks, must act with propriety, decorum, and above suspicion. Any conduct that diminishes public confidence in the judiciary is intolerable.
  4. Deterrence and Accountability:

    • The dismissal of Mrs. Blas serves as a stern reminder that misconduct, dishonesty, and actions prejudicial to the service will be met with severe consequences to preserve 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.