Case Summary (G.R. No. 260261)
Key Dates
• July 4, 1991 – Letter of authority served to examine Dr. Feliciano’s books.
• October 11, 1991 – Dr. Feliciano’s formal complaint to NBI.
• October 14–15, 1991 – NBI-assisted entrapment; marked money handed to Peligrino.
• April 24, 1998 – Sandiganbayan decision convicting Peligrino, acquitting Buenafe.
• August 24, 1998 – Final Sandiganbayan judgment.
• November 16, 1998 – Denial of motion for reconsideration.
• August 13, 2001 – Supreme Court decision affirming conviction.
Applicable Law
1987 Philippine Constitution; Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), Section 3(b).
Facts of the Case
Dr. Feliciano received a BIR letter of authority signed by Deputy Commissioner Santos, authorizing Peligrino (to be supervised by Buenafe) to audit his 1988–1989 income tax returns. During preliminary meetings, the BIR examiners allegedly demanded ₱200,000 as full “settlement,” of which ₱51,858.57 would satisfy tax liabilities and the balance appropriated personally. Dr. Feliciano requested NBI assistance and executed an affidavit. On October 15, 1991, only Peligrino appeared; upon receipt of a brown envelope containing marked bills (₱3,000 actual), he examined its contents, placed it beside him, and was immediately arrested by waiting NBI agents. Forensic analysis later confirmed fluorescent‐powder traces on his person. Buenafe did not appear on entrapment day.
Trial Proceedings and Evidence
Prosecution Evidence
• Testimony of Dr. Feliciano describing demand and receipt.
• NBI agents’ accounts of entrapment operations, marked‐money procedure, and arrest.
• Forensic Chemist’s report and diagrams confirming fluorescent powder on Peligrino.
• Documentary exhibits: authority letters, affidavits, inventory of seized items.
Defense Evidence
• Denials by Peligrino and Buenafe, asserting legitimate assessment procedures.
• Affidavits and certifications attesting to their official integrity and Dr. Feliciano’s litigious character.
• Co-accused Buenafe’s testimony that he merely served the letter of authority and processed payment orders legitimately.
Sandiganbayan Findings
• Elements of Section 3(b), RA 3019, established as to Peligrino: public officer, right to intervene, demand or receipt of benefit in a government transaction.
• Credited Dr. Feliciano and NBI testimonies as consistent, untainted by improper motive.
• Rejected frame-up and instigation defenses; distinguished lawful entrapment from impermissible instigation.
• Acquitted Buenafe due to insufficient proof of conspiracy or direct demand.
Issues on Appeal
- Whether demand and receipt of “boodle” money were proven beyond reasonable doubt.
- Reliability of Dr. Feliciano as sole complaining witness.
- Alleged violation of equal protection in convicting Peligrino while acquitting co-accused.
Supreme Court Ruling and Legal Analysis
Demand and Receipt under RA 3019
• Section 3(b) penalizes requesting or receiving any gift or benefit in transactions where a public officer may lawfully intervene. Proof of either element suffices for conviction.
• Peligrino’s act of opening the envelope, inspecting its contents, and placing it within his reach constituted “receipt” and implied acceptance. Momentary possession does not negate receipt if accompanied by circumstances indicating acquiescence.
Cred
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 260261)
Facts of the Case
- Petitioner Eutiquio A. Peligrino was an Examiner II of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), Region IV-A, tasked with examining income and business tax returns of medical practitioners.
- Co-accused Buenaventura V. Buenafe was Supervisor of the same region and a member of the Special Project Committee overseeing physician tax assessments.
- In July 1991, Buenafe delivered to Dr. Antonio N. Feliciano a BIR Letter of Authority (Exhibit K) authorizing Peligrino to examine the doctor’s 1988–1989 books.
- Before any formal audit, the accused were alleged to have demanded ₱200,000 from Dr. Feliciano: ₱51,858.57 to be paid to the BIR as tax deficiency and ₱148,141.43 to be appropriated by the accused.
- Dr. Feliciano sought NBI assistance and arranged an entrapment: only ₱3,000 of marked bills were provided in a brown envelope.
- On October 15, 1991 at about 4:00 p.m., Peligrino appeared in Dr. Feliciano’s office, accepted and opened the envelope, then was arrested by NBI agents upon a prearranged signal.
- Inventory of items seized from Peligrino included documents related to Feliciano’s tax assessment, a Prudential Bank check, BIR payment orders, and a marked brown envelope.
- Forensic examination by NBI chemist Dimpna Bermejo confirmed the presence of fluorescent powder on Peligrino’s person.
Procedural History
- October 17, 1991: Information filed in the Sandiganbayan, Criminal Case No. 17086, charging Peligrino under Section 3(b) of RA 3019.
- February 25, 1992: Informati