Title
Zambrano vs. Sandiganbayan
Case
G.R. No. 82067
Decision Date
Apr 10, 1992
A cashier at NFA was convicted of malversation for failing to account for P1.2M in public funds, despite claims of acting under superiors' orders and duress.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 82067)

Procedural History and Initial Conviction

The Sandiganbayan initially convicted Zambrano on August 28, 1986. Following this, she filed a motion for a new trial, which was granted. Upon her retrial, she entered a plea of not guilty. The prosecution’s primary witness, Carlito Capinpin, conducted an audit identifying various financial discrepancies amounting to the alleged malversed funds. A demand letter was sent to Zambrano in July 1980, requesting restitution for the identified shortage, but she did not comply.

Audit Examination and Evidence Presentation

Capinpin's audit revealed that Zambrano's financial records demonstrated significant cash shortages across various categories, amounting to P1,207,835.19. He testified about the methodology employed during the audit, noting that supporting documents were available for scrutiny. Conversely, Zambrano's defense witness, Cesario Mateo, challenged the prosecution's claims, asserting that many cash advances lacked appropriate documentation. However, he could not effectively explain why the entries appeared under Zambrano’s records.

Defense Testimony and Claims

In her defense, Zambrano argued that she had held multiple positions within the authority without previous issues and that a misunderstanding had led to the charges against her. She mentioned cash advances made at the behest of her superiors, which she contended corresponded to necessary government expenditures, albeit lacking formal documentation. Despite admitting to certain procedural oversights, she maintained that the failure to account for the funds was not solely her responsibility.

Sandiganbayan's Ruling

On January 8, 1988, the Sandiganbayan found Zambrano guilty of malversation of public funds. The court highlighted the established fact that Zambrano had received the funds but failed to return them upon demand. The court underscored that accountability was not negated merely because direct evidence of personal misuse of funds was absent, emphasizing legal precedents that support convictions based on the failure to account satisfactorily for missing public funds.

Final Findings and Conclusion

The Supreme Court, upon review, determined that the evidence against Zambrano was compelling, affirming the Sandiganbayan's conclusions regarding her negligence in handling public funds. The princip

...continue reading

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