Title
Fajardo vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 239823
Decision Date
Sep 25, 2019
Fajardo, a PCSO cashier, failed to account for P1.8M in public funds, admitted liability, and was convicted of malversation despite claims of duress and irregular audits. SC upheld the conviction.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-16619)

Facts:

  • Parties and Charge
    • Petitioner Angelica Anzia Fajardo was Cashier V and Officer-in-Charge, Division Chief III, Prize Payment (Teller) Division of the PCSO Treasury Department.
    • She was indicted for Malversation of Public Funds under Article 217, RPC, for misappropriating a ₱3,000,000 cash advance, of which ₱1,877,450 were found missing upon audit.
  • Audits and Investigations
    • On November 13, 2008, the PCSO Internal Audit Department (IAD) conducted a spot cash count, disclosing a ₱218,461 shortage; Fajardo was furnished the count sheet. Her vault was sealed on November 17, 2008.
    • Fajardo resumed duty on January 8, 2009; a joint audit with COA and PCSO revealed a total ₱1,877,450 deficit. She was served a demand letter on January 13, 2009 to explain or return missing funds within 72 hours.
  • Petitioner’s Response and Administrative Proceedings
    • On January 15, 2009, Fajardo requested more time to respond; on January 27, 2009, she admitted liability, offered ₱300,000 partial settlement and waived benefits.
    • The PCSO Legal Department found a prima facie administrative case and referred the matter for criminal filing.
  • Trial and Appellate Decisions
    • The RTC (February 17, 2017) convicted her of Malversation, sentencing her to 13 years and 4 months to 19 years and 4 months reclusion temporal, plus a ₱1,877,450 fine.
    • The Sandiganbayan (March 5, 2018) affirmed with modification under RA 10951, imposing prision mayor of 6 years and 1 day to 10 years and 1 day and the same fine; motion for reconsideration denied April 18, 2018.

Issues:

  • Whether the Sandiganbayan correctly found petitioner guilty of Malversation of Public Funds.
  • Whether Fajardo’s January 15 and 27, 2009 letters violated her rights to counsel or against self-incrimination.
  • Whether alleged irregularities in the spot audits or the theory of pilferage by a co-employee undermine her conviction.

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.