Title
Lumauig vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 166680
Decision Date
Jul 7, 2014
Former mayor convicted for failing to liquidate P101,736 cash advance despite acquittal on graft charges; penalty reduced due to voluntary surrender and restitution.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-19147-48)

Facts:

  • Procedural Background
  • In January 2001, the Sandiganbayan filed an Information charging Aloysius Dait Lumauig, then Municipal Mayor of Alfonso Lista, Ifugao, with failure to liquidate a cash advance of ₱101,736.00 under Article 218, Revised Penal Code (RPC) (Criminal Case No. 26528).
  • A separate Information for violation of Section 3(e), RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) was filed as Criminal Case No. 26527, both tried jointly.
  • On September 10, 2004, the Sandiganbayan acquitted Lumauig in the RA 3019 case but convicted him under Article 218, sentencing him to six months and one day prision correccional and a ₱1,000 fine.
  • The Sandiganbayan denied his motion for reconsideration on January 11, 2005. Petitioner elevated the case to the Supreme Court via a Rule 45 Petition for Review on Certiorari.
  • Underlying Facts
  • In August 1994, Lumauig received a P101,736.00 cash advance by Land Bank Check No. 11894200 for freight and insurance of 12 motorcycles donated by Manila City.
  • A 1998 COA audit by Auditor Paguirigan revealed no liquidation or payment to Royal Cargo Agencies; a certification of unliquidated advances was issued on November 29, 2001.
  • Paguirigan prepared demand letters that went unsent for lack of petitioner’s address.
  • Lumauig admitted non-liquidation, claiming the vehicles were turned over; he only paid the cash advance on June 4, 2001, prompting an Affidavit of Desistance by the incumbent mayor.

Issues:

  • Double Jeopardy and Separate Charges
  • Does Lumauig’s acquittal under RA 3019 bar his conviction under Article 218, RPC, based on the same cash advance?
  • Requirement of Prior Demand
  • Does Article 218, RPC, require a prior demand or notice to render accounts before liability attaches?
  • Liability under Article 218
  • Did Lumauig’s six-year delay in liquidation constitute failure to render accounts under Article 218?
  • Penalty Assessment
  • Should the penalty imposed be modified in light of mitigating circumstances (voluntary payment and restitution)?

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.