Title
Preclaro vs. Sandiganbayan
Case
G.R. No. 111091
Decision Date
Aug 21, 1995
A contractual government project manager demanded a bribe for favorable action on a construction project, leading to his arrest in an NBI entrapment. The Supreme Court affirmed his guilt under the Anti-Graft Law, ruling contractual employees as public officers.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 111091)

Key Dates

  • June 8, 1990 – Agreed date for the P200,000 payoff
  • June 14, 1990 – Information filed for violation of Sec. 3(b), RA 3019
  • July 20, 1990 – Arraignment; plea of “not guilty” entered
  • June 30, 1993 – Sandiganbayan conviction
  • August 21, 1995 – Supreme Court decision affirming the conviction

Applicable Law

  • 1987 Philippine Constitution (decision after 1990)
  • Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act), Sec. 2(b) (definition of public officer) and Sec. 3(b) (demand for or receipt of undue advantage)

Procedural Background

The Sandiganbayan found petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of demanding P200,000 as a portion of contractor’s profit, sentencing him to 6 years 1 month to 10 years 1 day imprisonment, perpetual disqualification from public office, and costs. Petitioner elevated the case to the Supreme Court, challenging jurisdiction (claiming he is not a public officer) and the sufficiency of evidence.

Antecedent Facts

  1. On October 1, 1989, ITDI (DOST) engaged petitioner under a one‐year renewable contract to supervise construction of the DOST‐CMD building in Bicutan, Taguig.
  2. Jaime Sta. Maria Construction was awarded the contract; Resoso served as its project engineer.
  3. In May 1990, while evaluating a Change Order for electrical work, petitioner approached Resoso and demanded P200,000 to “forget about” deductive charges, explaining the contractor’s profit was approximately P460,000.

Jurisdiction: Definition of “Public Officer”

Under Sec. 2(b), RA 3019 “includes elective and appointive officials and employees, permanent or temporary, … receiving compensation … from the government.” Civil Service classifications (PD 807; Administrative Code of 1987) place contractual personnel for a specific project within the non‐career service. Petitioner’s contractual status and compensation render him a public officer, satisfying Sandiganbayan jurisdiction.

Demand for Gratuity and Entrapment

  • Petitioner arranged a meeting at Wendy’s Restaurant for June 6, later postponed to June 8 upon request due to contractor’s cash constraints.
  • Sta. Maria Sr. reported the demand to the NBI; an entrapment plan was executed.
  • Resoso delivered P50,000 in P500 bills treated with fluorescent powder to the NBI, which concealed the money in an attaché case.
  • At the June 8 meeting, petitioner received two envelopes from Sta. Maria Jr., placed them under his arm, and was immediately arrested.

Forensic Examination

The NBI Forensic Chemistry Section tested petitioner’s right palmar hand under ultraviolet light, yielding a positive result for fluorescent powder. His clothing fluoresced inherently from dyes, but the hand test alone established contact with the entrapment money.

Credibility, Consistency, and Motive

  • Alleged inconsistencies (number of bills powdered vs. total sum) were reconciled by differentiating between funds delivered to the NBI and bills dusted for entrapment.
  • Petitioner’s argument that he lacked authority or opportunity to deman

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.