G.R. No. 175991; August 31, 2011
JOSE R. CATACUTAN vs. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES
Facts:
Petitioner Jose Catacutan was held guilty before the Sandiganbayan
for the violation of Section 3(e) of RA 3019(Anti-Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act) for his refusal to implement the promotion and appointments
of Georgito Posesano and
Magdalena A. Divinagracia as Vocational Supervisors III despite the directive
of CHED and the Civil Service commission. Catacutan questioned the judgment,
contending that he was denied due process when he was not allowed to present the
CA judgment, dismissing the adiminstrative case against him.
Issue:
Whether or not the judgment, finding petitioner
guilty of violating RA 3019, was well founded despite the refusal of the trial
court to admit the dismissal of the administrative case as evidence.
Held:
The stubborn defiance by petitioner in carrying
out the memorandum issued by CHED was attended by ill motive and bad faith.
Such factual finding by the Trial courts, which was affirmed by the
sandiganbayan, was based on the evidence presented before it. The
non-admittance of the dismissal of the administrative case did not violate
petitioner’s right to due process where such dismissal was not relevant to the
adjudication of the criminal case. After all, administrative proceedings
require a different quantum of proof compared to criminal proceedings, the judgment
in one is not dependent on the other.
Present in the case were the elements to find the
petitioner guilty of violating Sec3(e) of RA 3019, to wit: 1.that the accused
was a public officer performing an official function; 2) that he acted in bad
faith; and 3) that injury was caused to another party because of such act.
