ChanRobles Virtual law Library

chanrobles.com - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT RESOLUTIONS - ON-LINE

cralaw_scresolutions_separator.NHAD

[A.M. No. P-96-1208.November 12, 2001]

JUDGE CRUZ JR. et al. vs. ROBERTO DL. MENDOZA et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentleman:

Quoted hereunder , for your information ,is a resolution of this Court dated NOV 12 2001.

A.M. No. P-96-1208(Judge Escolastico U. Cruz, Jr., Regional Trial Court, Branch 58, Makati City vs. Roberto DL. Mendoza, Administrative Officer I, Regional Trial Court, Office of the Clerk of Court, Makati City.)

A.M. No. RTJ-96-1352(Roberto DL. Mendoza v. Judge Escolastico U. Cruz, Jr. and Deputy Sheriff Nory Santos, both of Regional Trial Court, Branch 58, Makati City.)

A.M. No. RTJ-96-1352

This is a complaint filed by Roberto De Leon Mendoza against Judge Escolastico U. Cruz, Jr. and Deputy Sheriff Nory Santos, both of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Makati City, Branch 58. Mendoza charged respondent Judge Cruz with Physical Injuries, Grave Threats and Arbitrary Detention for allegedly mauling, detaining and verbally abusing him inside the chambers of Judge Cruz, while his co-respondent Sheriff watched in approval and insured that the door of respondent judge's chambers remained locked to prevent his escape.

According to Mendoza, on May 24, 1996, Sheriff Santos went to his office and inquired about his altercation with Gilbert Murillo, a court aide of Judge Escolastico U. Cruz, Jr. of RTC, Branch 58, Makati City. After giving his side, he was asked to go to the chambers of Judge Cruz. A few minutes later, another person arrived whom the respondent judge sent to look for the complainant. So Mendoza followed this person and upon reaching the chambers of respondent judge, the latter shouted: "Mendoza pumasok ka dito sa aking kuwarto," and pulled him inside his chambers. As he sat on the chair in front of the respondent judge's desk, the latter again shouted at him: "mayabang, arogante" and "bakit inilala gay ko raw ang batas sa aking mga kamay." At this point, Judge Cruz asked the sheriff to lock the door and guard it.

Judge Cruz allegedly continued to berate and shout at Mendoza while they were inside the judge's chambers. Not content with the verbal abuse, respondent judge hit him twice on the left and right breast and twice on the knees. Mendoza was also intimidated by the two (2) guns that the judge placed on top of his (respondent judge's) table.

When Gilbert Murillo arrived an hour later with a medical certificate, respondent judge asked the sheriff to accompany them to the police station so that appropriate charges could be filed.

Mendoza is now alleging in this complaint that all these acts of respondent judge show his predisposition in taking the law in his own hands contrary to his sworn duty to uphold every man's right to due process of law. Mendoza also alleges that Judge Cruz violated Canon 2 and Rule 2.01 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which states:

Canon 2 - A judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities.

Rule 2.01 - A judge should so behave at all times as to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

In their Comment dated August 30, 1996, respondents aver that the instant complaint was resorted to cover up for two (2) criminal acts earlier committed by Mendoza. The first pertains to an incident where complainant allegedly mauled Gilbert Murillo, and the other pertains to complainant's thwarted effort to fix a bail bond which is the subject matter of A.M. No. P-96-1208 entitled "Judge Escolastico Cruz, Jr. vs. Roberto De Leon Mendoza" and consolidated with this case.

According to respondents' version of the facts of the case, on May 24, 1996, complainant slapped Murillo for allegedly imitating the way he walked. After learning that Murillo was slapped by complainant, respondent judge summoned complainant Mendoza to explain his side of the story. Mendoza replied, "(P)aano po Judge ako'y kanyang niloloko at gina gaya po niya ang aking paglakad, kaya po hindi ako nakapagpigil at akin siyang binugbog, pasensiya na po kayo Judge at hindi na po mauu!it at saka hindi ko naman po a/am na siya ay empleyado mo." Respondent judge also denied the claim of Mendoza that he was arbitrarily detained. According to respondent judge, Mendoza's charge that he was hit by the respondent judge are mere fabrications, since the medical certificate produced by Mendoza does not reflect the injuries allegedly inflicted by respondent judge. Further, normal court business ensued while Mendoza was inside the chambers. Several staff members of RTC, Branch 58 freely went in and out of respondent judge's chambers but no one witnessed the alleged beating which Mendoza claimed. Several affidavits were executed by the court personnel attesting to this fact.

For his part, Sheriff Santos explained that he merely listened to the conversation which transpired between respondent judge and complainant Mendoza inside the chambers. According to him, he sat on the sofa and likened what he witnessed to that of a scene where a father scolds and reprimands his son who terribly misbehaved.

A.M. No. P-96-1208

In this case, the complainant is Judge Escolastico Cruz, Jr. who is charging respondent Roberto De Leon Mendoza with Gross Misconduct and for violation of the Revised Administrative Code.

Judge Cruz alleged that on January 20, 1996, Mendoza went to his house requesting for the approval of the personal bail bond of the accused in Criminal Case No. 96-911-051 pending before Judge Leticia P. Morales, RTC, Branch 140; Makati. Mendoza allegedly represented to Judge Cruz that Judge Morales reduced the bond recommended to 20%, prompting Judge Cruz to approve the same. Two (2) days later, in a meeting attended by Judge Cruz, Judge Morales and Mendoza, Judge Cruz learned that Judge Morales merely reduced the amount of the bond by 20% and Mendoza was aware of this fact. Judge Cruz was then constrained to set aside his Order approving the bond in view of this development, which according to him, amounted to misconduct.

In his Comment, Mendoza denied that he committed any misconduct in the bail bond incident. He insists that if there was any misconduct in the granting thereof, it was attributable to Judge Cruz who approved the bail bond in question. As a judge, it was incumbent upon him to ascertain the correctness of the information given to him when determining the propriety of the bail bond application. Failure to do so is tantamount to dereliction of duty.

The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) submitted its report absolving Deputy Sheriff Santos of the charge since it was found that he merely sat on one end of the room and never laid a hand on Mendoza. In the case of Judge Cruz however, although there was no evidence that he inflicted physical injuries upon Mendoza, the OCA recommended that he be reprimanded for intruding upon the case involving Mendoza and Murillo. The fact still exists that he deliberately called Mendoza to his chambers where he scolded and scared Mendoza by placing a handgun on top of his table. Finally, in the case of Mendoza, the OCA found him guilty of grave misconduct because he misrepresented to Judge Cruz the true amount of the bail bond, together with the fact that he even went to the extent of accompanying the accused in that case in the early morning of January 20, 1996 to the house of Judge Cruz for the approval of the bail bond. This is a practice of court employees which should be discouraged since it is a fertile ground for graft and corruption. For his part, Judge Cruz was a bit negligent in hastily approving the bail bond. He should have studied the recommendations of Judge Morales and not merely rely on the representations of Mendoza.

Further development ensued when, on March 19, 1997, Mendoza wrote a letter of apology to Judge Cruz, Sheriff Santos and Gilbert Murillo. He apologized to Judge Cruz saying that there is no truth to the allegations he made in support of the charges he filed against Judge Cruz for slight physical injuries and disbarment. He also apologized to Sheriff Santos for dragging him into this mess even though he did nothing wrong against Mendoza. Finally, he apologized to Gilbert Murillo for hitting him as he stated that he had no intentions of hurting Murillo.

In view of this latest development, Judge Cruz and Sheriff Santos filed on April 17, 1997 a Manifestation and Motion praying for the dismissal of the Administrative Matter No. RTJ-96-1352 for lack of merit. They also claim that in view of Mendoza's desistance and apology, the criminal case filed against Judge Cruz before Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 64, Makati City had already been dismissed. Complainant Mendoza in Adm. Matter No. RTJ-96-1352 likewise filed a Motion to Dismiss, praying that the two (2) cases be dismissed for the reason that the parties have already patched up their misunderstanding.

In a Memorandum submitted by the Office of the Court Administrator to the Supreme Court, then Court Administrator Alfredo L. Benipayo recommended the denial of the prayer of both parties for the dismissal of these consolidated cases for the reason that administrative cases are not private in nature but are impressed with public interest.

We agree with the recommendation of the then Court Administrator Benipayo. These cases are imbued with public interest, hence, they should not be dismissed upon the agreement of the parties. After this Court has taken cognizance of the said complaints, the complainants are not anymore at liberty to dismiss or withdraw their complaints just because they filed the same out of a misunderstanding or they have lost interest in prosecuting the case. 1 Zamora v. Jumamoy, 238 SCRA 587, 592 (1994).The fact that Mendoza has apologized to Judge Cruz should not result in the dismissal of the case against him. Similarly, the contention of Judge Cruz that the complaint against him should be dismissed because the criminal cases filed against him had already been dismissed is untenable. The outcome of a criminal case should not affect the proceedings in the administrative action. 2 OCA v. Enriquez, 218 SCRA 1, 10 (1993).

We hereby adopt the findings of the OCA. In Adm. Matter No. RTJ-96-1352, it is undisputed that Mendoza was indeed called to the chambers of Judge Cruz, relative to the incident between Mendoza and Murillo. However, Mendoza failed to present any proof to substantiate his claim, except a Temporary Medical Certificate without any specification of the injuries that he suffered. However, even though we adopt that finding that Judge Cruz never laid a hand on Mendoza, the fact still exists that he called Mendoza to his chambers where he threatened Mendoza for hitting Murillo. Even though he intended to berate Mendoza for his felonious actions, he should have exercised restraint and civility.

However, Deputy Sheriff Santos is absolved from any liability in the alleged mauling incident involving Mendoza and Judge Cruz because there was simply no sufficient evidence to prove his involvement in the matter.

In Adm. Matter No. P-96-1208, the act of Mendoza in accompanying the accused to the house of Judge Cruz for the approval of the bond, coupled with the deliberate misrepresentation he made to Judge Cruz regarding the correct amount of bail in said case, amounts to Grave Misconduct. Judge Cruz is also liable for simple negligence. He should have studied the recommendation of Judge Morales and not merely relied on the representations of Mendoza.

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing:

a) Judge Escolastico U. Cruz, Jr. of RTC, Branch 58, Makati City is hereby REPRIMANDED for simple negligence and violation of Canon 2 and Rule 2.01 of the Code of Judicial Conduct with WARNING that a repetition of a similar offense in the future will be dealt with more severely;

b) The case against Deputy Sheriff Honorio Santos, RTC, Branch 58, Makati City is DISMISSED for lack of merit; and

c) Roberto De Leon Mendoza, Administrative Officer, RTC-OCC, Makati City is hereby found guilty of gross misconduct and FINED Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00) with a WARNING that a repetition of similar acts in the future will be dealt with more severely.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) TOMASITA M. DRIS
Clerk of Court


Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

 







chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com