Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 298 views

    Azarcon V Batausa Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Abigail Tolabing
    The Sandiganbayan charged Alfredo Azarcon, a private contractor, with malversation of public funds for failing to safekeep property that was distrained by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) from one of Azarcon's subcontractors named Jaime Ancla who owed taxes. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sandiganbayan did not have jurisdiction over Azarcon as a private individual, even though the BIR designated him as custodian of the distrained property. As a private individual, Azarcon could not be deemed a public officer and charged with malversation. The Court overturned Azarcon's conviction and found that the Sandiganbayan erroneously took cognizance of the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Azarcon V Batausa Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Abigail Tolabing
    298 views1 page
    The Sandiganbayan charged Alfredo Azarcon, a private contractor, with malversation of public funds for failing to safekeep property that was distrained by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) from one of Azarcon's subcontractors named Jaime Ancla who owed taxes. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sandiganbayan did not have jurisdiction over Azarcon as a private individual, even though the BIR designated him as custodian of the distrained property. As a private individual, Azarcon could not be deemed a public officer and charged with malversation. The Court overturned Azarcon's conviction and found that the Sandiganbayan erroneously took cognizance of the

    Original Title

    AZARCON V BATAUSA CASE DIGEST

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Sandiganbayan charged Alfredo Azarcon, a private contractor, with malversation of public funds for failing to safekeep property that was distrained by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) from one of Azarcon's subcontractors named Jaime Ancla who owed taxes. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sandiganbayan did not have jurisdiction over Azarcon as a private individual, even though the BIR designated him as custodian of the distrained property. As a private individual, Azarcon could not be deemed a public officer and charged with malversation. The Court overturned Azarcon's conviction and found that the Sandiganbayan erroneously took cognizance of the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    298 views1 page

    Azarcon V Batausa Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Abigail Tolabing
    The Sandiganbayan charged Alfredo Azarcon, a private contractor, with malversation of public funds for failing to safekeep property that was distrained by the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) from one of Azarcon's subcontractors named Jaime Ancla who owed taxes. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sandiganbayan did not have jurisdiction over Azarcon as a private individual, even though the BIR designated him as custodian of the distrained property. As a private individual, Azarcon could not be deemed a public officer and charged with malversation. The Court overturned Azarcon's conviction and found that the Sandiganbayan erroneously took cognizance of the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    LCP

    SUBJECT: CRIM LAW 2


    TOPIC:

    AZARCON V BATAUSA
    GR 116033

    GENERAL RULE OF LAW/DOCTRINE

    FACTS
    Petitioner Alfredo Azarcon owned and operated an earth-moving business, hauling" dirt and ore with his
    services contracted by the Paper Industries Corporation of the Philippines (PICOP). A Warrant of Distraint of
    Personal Property was issued by the Main Office of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) commanding the RD
    to distraint the goods, chattels or effects and other personal property of Jaime Ancla, a sub-contractor of
    accused Azarcon and, a delinquent taxpayer. The Warrant of Garnishment was issued to accused Alfredo
    Azarcon ordering him to transfer, surrender, transmit and/or remit to BIR the property in his possession
    owned by taxpayer Ancla.

    Petitioner Azarcon, in signing the "Receipt for Goods, Articles, and Things Seized Under Authority of the
    National Internal Revenue," assumed the undertakings specified in the receipt and received the Isuzu Dump
    Truck with the liabilities of safekeeping and preserving the unit in behalf of the Bureau of Internal Revenue.
    Azarcon informed the BIR that Ancla withdrew the equipment from Azarcon’s custody. The Sandiganbayan
    found that Ancla was renting out the truck to a certain contractor by the name of Oscar Cueva at PICOP
    Batausa, the Director filed a letter-complaint against the (herein Petitioner) and Ancla and was charged
    before the Sandiganbayan with the crime of malversation of public funds or property.

    The petitioner filed a motion for reinvestigation before the Sandiganbayan alleging that: (1) the petitioner
    never appeared in the preliminary investigation; and (2) the petitioner was not a public officer, hence a doubt
    exists as to why he was being charged with malversation. SandiganBayan finds accused Alfredo Azarcon y
    Leva GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced imprisonment ranging from TEN (10) YEARS and ONE
    (1) DAY of prision mayor in its maximum period to SEVENTEEN (17) YEARS, FOUR (4) MONTHS and ONE (1)
    DAY of Reclusion Temporal.

    ISSUES AND RULINGS

    WON the Sandiganbayan have jurisdiction over a private individual who is charged with malversation of
    public funds as a principal after the said individual had been designated by the Bureau of Internal Revenue as
    a custodian of distrained property

    Ruling: None. We find no provision in the NIRC constituting such person a public officer by reason of such
    requirement. The BIR's power authorizing a private individual to act as a depositary cannot be stretched to
    include the power to appoint him as a public officer.

    The language of the foregoing provision is clear. A private individual who has in his charge any of the public
    funds or property enumerated therein and commits any of the acts defined in any of the provisions of
    Chapter Four, Title Seven of the RPC, should likewise be penalized with the same penalty meted to erring
    public officers. Nowhere in this provision is it expressed or implied that a private individual falling under said
    Article 222 is to be deemed a public officer.
    Note: After a thorough review of the case at bench, the Court thus finds Petitioner Alfredo Azarcon and his
    co-accused Jaime Ancla to be both private individuals erroneously charged before and convicted by
    Respondent Sandiganbayan which had no jurisdiction over them. The Sandiganbayan's taking cognizance of
    this case is of no moment since "(j)urisdiction cannot be conferred by . . . erroneous belief of the court that it
    had jurisdiction." 

    1
    <CRIM B >
    <Case Title> by <MILLER>

    You might also like