Case Summary (G.R. No. 195665)
Key Dates
• July 2004 – Initial telephone contact and SMS exchanges between Nuez and Cruz-Apao.
• September 24 & 28, 2004 – Face-to-face meetings and entrapment operation at Jollibee.
• October 18, 2004 – Ad hoc committee issues resolution finding a prima facie case and recommends preventive suspension.
• January 28, 2005 – Committee’s final report recommends dismissal.
• April 12, 2005 – Supreme Court en banc decision.
Applicable Law
• 1987 Philippine Constitution (public office as public trust).
• Code of Conduct for Court Personnel (Canon I, Sections 1 & 2).
• Rules on Electronic Evidence (A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC).
• Civil Service rules and Supreme Court administrative issuances.
Factual Background
Nuez’s illegal-dismissal case against PAGCOR lingered in the CA for over two years. Seeking a speedy favorable decision, he contacted Cruz-Apao, who allegedly demanded ₱1,000,000 from him, asserting that the amount was fixed by the decision-writer. Nuez reported the extortion to the Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Commission Special Projects Group, prompting coordination with GMA Network’s Imbestigador and the Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Task Force to conduct an entrapment operation.
Investigating Committee and Mandate
Presiding Justice Cancio C. Garcia issued Office Order No. 297-04-CG, naming Justice Rodrigo V. Cosico as chairman and Justices Salazar-Fernando and Dimaampao as members. The committee was tasked to investigate, hold hearings, evaluate evidence, and recommend administrative sanctions.
Committee Findings and Recommendations
Upon hearings and evidence review, the committee’s October 18, 2004 resolution found a prima facie case of dishonesty and serious misconduct, recommending a 90-day preventive suspension. Its January 28, 2005 report concluded that the gravity of the offense warranted dismissal from service.
Entrapment Operation Details
Undercover agents and Imbestigador personnel accompanied Nuez to two meetings at Jollibee, where he carried a brown envelope containing marked (UV-dusted) and dummy bills. Respondent confirmed the ₱1,000,000 demand, negotiating terms but refusing reduction. Upon her touching the envelope at the second meeting, agents arrested her; laboratory tests confirmed UV powder on her hands.
Respondent’s Defense
Cruz-Apao claimed instigation by Nuez rather than entrapment, asserting he offered the money and that agents forcibly placed the envelope in her hands. She denied recalling incriminating SMS messages and maintained her innocence.
Analysis of Evidence
The Court found the entrapment operation lawful and respondent’s defense unconvincing. SMS logs, admitted under the Rules on Electronic Evidence and authenticated by respondent’s own acknowledgment, corroborated her solicitation. Testimonies of Nuez and independent witness Siringan were consistent; respondent’s denials were self-serving and cont
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 195665)
Facts of the Case
- Complainant Zaldy Nuez filed an administrative complaint against Elvira Cruz-Apao, Executive Assistant II of the 15th Division, Court of Appeals (CA).
- Allegation: respondent solicited ₱1,000,000 from complainant in exchange for a speedy and favorable decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 73460 (PAGCOR vs. Zaldy Nuez).
- Initial complaint lodged with GMA Network’s Imbestigador Action Center and Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Commission–Special Projects Group (PAOCC-SPG).
Complaint and Entrapment Operation
- PAOCC-SPG coordinated with Imbestigador to plan an entrapment.
- On 28 September 2004, at Jollibee, Times Plaza Building, Manila, PAOCTF agents staged the hand-over of marked money.
- Complainant carried an envelope with bundles of marked bills and decoy currency; three Imbestigador crew secretly recorded.
- Respondent arrived, expressed fear of entrapment, negotiated price and meeting logistics, then touched the envelope.
- Agents arrested respondent on the spot and conducted an ultra-violet powder test at WPD, confirming contact.
Ad Hoc Investigating Committee
- CA Presiding Justice Garcia issued Office Order No. 297-04-CG creating a three-member ad hoc committee.
- Committee’s mandate: conduct exhaustive investigation and recommend administrative sanctions.
- 18 October 2004 Resolution: found prima facie dishonesty and serious misconduct; imposed 90-day preventive suspension.
- 28 January 2005 Report: recommended dismissal based on evidence and hearings.
Procedural Posture and Charges
- Case elevated to the Supreme Court en banc as A.M. No. CA-05-18-P.
- Charges: Dishonesty and Grave Misconduct under the Code of Conduct for Cou