Title
Office of the Court Administrator vs. Nemia Alma Y. Almanoche
Case
A.M. No. P-19-3923
Decision Date
Jan 30, 2024
A court stenographer solicited money to influence a case, leading to her dismissal for serious dishonesty, tarnishing judicial integrity.

Case Summary (A.M. No. P-19-3923)

Background of the Allegations

The allegations were initiated by a letter from Judge Camannong to Acting Presiding Judge Eldred D. Cole, informing him of claims that Almanoche solicited PHP 20,000 from Jean Baguio in exchange for arranging the dismissal of a criminal case against Baguio’s sons. Judge Camannong learned of this solicitation from her legal researcher, Louie Veluz, who was informed by a job order worker, Dianne Balansag. Upon verifying the information with Prosecutor Iris T. Panganiban, who had also been informed by Baguio and Balansag, Judge Camannong pursued a formal investigation.

Affidavit of Baguio and Subsequent Investigative Actions

On May 7, 2018, Baguio provided a detailed account of the solicitation circumstances in an affidavit, stating that on April 27, 2018, Almanoche requested PHP 15,000 for what she claimed would be distributed to the judge, prosecutor, and Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) lawyer to secure the dismissal of the case against Baguio's sons. Unable to pay the full amount at once, Baguio initially provided PHP 1,000 and later secured an additional PHP 5,000 from a local Kagawad to reach the total amount requested.

Internal Judicial Proceedings

Judge Cole referred the letter and subsequent complaint to Executive Judge Isobel G. Barroso, who then sent it to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) for processing. The OCA categorically treated the letter as an administrative complaint for grave misconduct. Almanoche was directed to submit comments regarding the allegations, in which she denied any wrongdoing, asserting that she did not solicit any funds for the dismissal of the case.

Findings of the Investigative Body

Judge Barroso conducted an investigation, including a summary hearing, where testimonies from both Baguio and Almanoche were presented. Judge Barroso reported that Baguio's account was credible and supported by the testimonies of other witnesses, including Prosecutor Panganiban and the PAO lawyer present during the initial discussions. Despite recognizing mitigating factors, including Almanoche's lengthy service and her status as a first-time offender, Barroso found her guilty of violating several provisions of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel.

Judicial Integrity Board and Final Recommendations

In a report by the Judicial Integrity Board (JIB), it was determined that the evidence substantiated allegations of serious dishonesty against Almanoche. The JIB submitted that, while the offense did not directly relate to her job functions, her solicitation of money constituted serious dishonesty due to its adverse effect on the public's confidence in the judiciary. The JIB recommended her dismissal from service, emphasizing that her alleged misconduct was incompatible with

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.