Title
Supreme Court
Buencamino vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 216745-46
Decision Date
Nov 10, 2020
Mayor Buencamino acquitted of graft charges due to lack of evident bad faith, variance in allegations, and insufficient prosecution evidence.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 216745-46)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background
    • Edmundo Jose T. Buencamino served as Municipal Mayor of San Miguel, Bulacan (2004).
    • Rosemoor Mining and Development Corporation (RMDC) operates marble quarries; Constantino A. Pascual is its President and private complainant.
  • Charges and Informations
    • Criminal Case No. SB-06-CRM-0419
      • Allegation: Petitioner, through evident bad faith, imposed and collected a ₱1,000 “pass way” fee per RMDC truck via a private individual, Robert Tabernero, without legal sanction (no valid ordinance or resolution).
    • Criminal Case No. SB-06-CRM-0420
      • Allegation: Petitioner, through evident bad faith, ordered the apprehension and impounding of RMDC trucks (plate nos. PSZ-706, UEX-283) for failure to pay the same fee.
  • Trial Proceedings
    • Prosecution witnesses:
      • Constantino A. Pascual (RMDC President) – testified about the demand and collection of fees, lack of legal basis, impounding of trucks.
      • Zenaida P. Pascual, Clarissa Pascual Fernando (RMDC officers) – corroborated undue injury and operational disruption.
      • Marciano T. Cruz (Municipal Treasurer) – testified on irregular official receipts and delayed remittances.
    • Documentary Evidence: Official receipts, certification letters, DILG preliminary report, police blotter certificate, mayoral memorandum.
    • Petitioner’s Defense:
      • Denied knowledge of any voiding of the municipal resolution (Kapasiyahan 89A-055/Kautusang Bayan 029) which he believed still authorized the fee.
      • Explained Tabernero’s role as job-order employee authorized for convenience to collect fees.
      • Denied issuing impounding instructions and asserted all fees were remitted properly.
  • Sandiganbayan Decision (Feb 18, 2015)
    • Found all elements of Section 3(e), RA 3019 proven: undue injury attendant to evident bad faith and gross inexcusable negligence.
    • Convicted petitioner on both counts; sentenced him to 6 years 1 month to 8 years imprisonment per count and perpetual disqualification from public office.

Issues:

  • Admissibility and Sufficiency of Evidence
    • Were photocopies of resolutions, DILG report, blotter certificate and other documents admissible or hearsay?
    • Did the prosecution prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt?
  • Accusatory Pleading vs. Conviction
    • Did convicting petitioner for “gross inexcusable negligence” violate due process when Informations charged only “evident bad faith” under Section 3(e), RA 3019?
  • Element of Bad Faith and Undue Injury
    • Was there proof that petitioner acted with evident bad faith?
    • Was undue injury to RMDC or the Government established as required?

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.