Title
Withholding of the Salary and Benefits of Michael A. Latiza
Case
A.M. No. 03-3-179-RTC, 03-10-576-RTC
Decision Date
Jan 26, 2005
Court aide Michael Latiza admitted liability for the loss of P24,800 from evidence in a criminal case, resigned, and was fined P40,000, forfeited benefits, and barred from re-employment.

Case Summary (A.M. No. 2011-04-SC)

Background of Events

In a criminal case filed before the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City, a significant amount of evidence in the form of cash was found to be short by P24,800 after a recount by Court Interpreter Alicia Caburnay and others, including Latiza. Upon discovery of the shortage, Latiza admitted to allowing outsiders to stay in the courtroom, leading to suspicions about his involvement. Subsequent to these incidents, he failed to report for duty and was noted as being absent without leave (AWOL).

Administrative Complaints and Investigations

On February 18, 2003, Branch Clerk of Court Aurora Ventura-Villamor reported Latiza’s AWOL status and requested the withholding of his salary and benefits due to his unexplained absences and alleged involvement in the loss of evidence. Following a directive from the Supreme Court, an investigation was led by Executive Judge Pampio A. Abarintos. Latiza, despite summons, did not appear during the investigation and could not be located at his last known address.

Findings and Recommendations

The investigating judge's report emphasized Latiza's AWOL status, his sudden resignation, and affidavits from co-employees confirming his admission of liability for the lost amount. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) discovered Latiza's previous pending administrative case for insubordination and simple misconduct, recommending his resignation be accepted but maintaining consequences in light of the ongoing administrative issues.

Court En Banc's Findings

The Court En Banc concluded that Latiza's absence, refusal to cooperate in the investigation, and resignation were all indicative of his guilt concerning the mishandling of court evidence. The findings further established that Latiza's actions constituted dishonesty and grave misconduct, which are serious offenses meriting severe disciplinary action.

Penalties Imposed

Due to Latiza's resignation, dismissal from service was not applicable; however, a fine of P40,000 was imposed for the offenses of dishonesty and grave misconduct. Additionally, all his retirement benefits, excluding accrued leave credits, were forfeited, and he was disqualified from future employment in any government capacity.

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.