Title
Amper vs. Sandiganbayan
Case
G.R. No. 120391
Decision Date
Sep 24, 1997
Simplicio Amper, a Davao City official, was convicted for unauthorized use of a government backhoe for personal treasure hunting, violating anti-graft laws. Witness testimonies, including Mayor Duterte's, established guilt. Supreme Court upheld the conviction, rejecting claims of newly discovered evidence.
A

Case Summary (G.R. No. 5960)

Charges and Violations

Simplicio Amper was charged with violating Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019, known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. This section prohibits public officials from causing undue injury to any party through manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence in their official functions.

Factual Background of the Case

The Information against Amper stated that on August 7, 1988, he unlawfully used a city government-owned backhoe for personal treasure hunting purposes without the authority or consent of the City Government of Davao, leading to injury to the government. The charge was based on eyewitness testimonies, including that of Filemon Cantela, who observed Amper and others preparing for a treasure hunting operation using the backhoe.

Evidence Presented

During the trial, the prosecution presented witnesses who testified to witnessing Amper operating the backhoe for the purpose of treasure hunting. Notably, Cantela, along with members of the Civil Security Unit, engaged in surveillance and reported Amper’s activities to then-Mayor Rodrigo Duterte. The backhoe operator, Tobias Porta, corroborated that Amper directed him to excavate the area for gold.

Petitioner's Defense

Amper denied the allegations, asserting that the use of the backhoe was authorized as it was leased to another party, Francisco Chavez. However, he failed to present credible evidence or witnesses to substantiate his claims. The Sandiganbayan found his assertions lacking merit, especially since he was caught in the act of directing the backhoe operations.

Sandiganbayan's Decision

On March 6, 1995, the Sandiganbayan convicted Amper of violating the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, sentencing him to imprisonment for six years and one month, perpetual special disqualification from public office, and costs of suit. The court noted the overwhelming evidence against Amper and emphasized the discrepancies and unsupported claims made in his defense.

Review of Evidence and Findings

The Supreme Court affirmed the Sandiganbayan's conviction, highlighting that the eyewitness testimonies were consistent and credible. It reiterated that denials had little weight when countered by positive identification. The conviction was also supported by the lack of evidence of any ulterior motives influencing the witne

...continue reading

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.