Title
Carpio vs. Gonzales
Case
A.M. No. P-2390
Decision Date
Mar 29, 1982
Deputy Clerk Gonzales dismissed for grave misconduct, dishonesty, corruption, misappropriation, immorality, and falsification of records, forfeiting benefits and barred from government service.
A

Case Digest (A.M. No. P-2390)

Facts:

Francisco M. Gonzales, Deputy Clerk of Court, Court of First Instance of Davao del Sur, Branch V, was charged in an administrative complaint initiated by Judge Lucas D. Carpio with grave misconduct, dishonesty, abuse of authority, corruption, falsification of time records, immorality, and conduct prejudicial to the best interests of the service. Gonzales was appointed on November 7, 1972 as deputy clerk of court after serving as interpreter since June 16, 1970. In a letter dated April 5, 1977, Judge Carpio directed Gonzales to explain why he should not be investigated and disciplined for 31 alleged irregular acts involving supposed exactions and mishandling of court property and funds. Gonzales submitted written explanations on May 16, 1977, denying or minimizing the allegations charge by charge. The administrative hearings were set by Judge Carpio initially on May 27, 1977, but did not proceed due to Gonzales’ alleged pulmonary tuberculosis; subsequent hearings were conducted on January 17 and 20, and March 13, 1978, by Judge Carpio. The investigation report and recommendation of Judge Carpio were not submitted to the Supreme Court; the records were later accidentally discovered in his files after his disability retirement took effect on August 7, 1979. Executive Judge Marcelino M. Francisco forwarded the records to the Supreme Court through an indorsement dated May 23, 1980, and the forwarded narrative highlighted additional developments, including Gonzales’ handling of trust funds in a special proceeding involving a deposited amount and related orders of the trial court. In particular, the indorsement recited that in Special Proceedings No. 42, P20,580.00 had been deposited with the office of the provincial treasurer on May 31, 1974, and later ordered withdrawn and deposited with the Deputy Clerk of Court, Branch V pursuant to an order dated May 22, 1976; the check was deposited by Gonzales on May 28, 1976, and he later claimed that the money was intact and that he would bring the passbooks or money for deposit to the PNB in Digos as of the earliest available time. However, on April 6, 1977, Gonzales turned over only P10,000.00 to the clerk of court, and despite an order dated April 27, 1977 requiring deposit of the remaining P10,580.00, he ultimately remitted the balance in later installments and only after delays. The indorsement further alleged that Gonzales refused to be audited by the provincial auditor, prompting the filing of criminal charges for violation of Article 218 of the Revised Penal Code, with Criminal Case No. 104(78) filed on August 10, 1978. During the administrative proceedings, witnesses adversely affected by Gonzales’ actuations testified, including Emilio Navarro, Jesusa Camporedondo Surposa, Estela Crumb Alberca, Antonio Malipayon, Felisa Malipayon, Rosela Orcullo, and Gabriel Loyola, and their testimonies supported findings that Gonzales made demands from litigants and received money for alleged services or preparations not properly supported by his official authority, and that certain funds deposited with him as receiver were not produced when required. The Court also considered additional matters raised in the records, including findings supporting immorality based on an illicit relationship and a civil case decision against him for support and damages. After evaluation of the entire record, the Court found sufficient evidence supporting the described grave offenses and resolved to impose the ultimate disciplinary penalty.

Issues:

Whether Francisco M. Gonzales should be held administratively liable for grave misconduct, abuse of authority, dishonesty, corruption, falsification of time records, immorality, and habitual absenteeism, warranting dismissal from the service.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.