GR L 62439; (October, 1984) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-62439 October 23, 1984
GREGORY JAMES POZAR, petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, respondent.
FACTS
Petitioner Gregory James Pozar, an American citizen, was charged with Corruption of a Public Official. The information alleged that on December 17, 1979, in Angeles City, Pozar, an applicant for probation, gave City Probation Officer Danilo Ocampo a P100 bill under circumstances that would make Ocampo liable for bribery. The prosecution evidence established that Pozar left a closed envelope for Ocampo with clerk Ricardo Manalo. When Ocampo opened it two days later, it contained probation-related papers with a P100 bill attached. Ocampo remarked on the impropriety, kept the items briefly, and later instructed Manalo to return them to Pozar, which was not accomplished. Pozar denied any corrupt intent, claiming the money was intended to cover potential photocopying expenses for his probation application documents.
ISSUE
Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that petitioner Gregory James Pozar is guilty of the crime of Corruption of a Public Official.
RULING
The Supreme Court modified the lower courts’ decisions, finding petitioner guilty only of attempted corruption. The Court affirmed the factual findings of the trial and appellate courts, which found Pozar’s claim that the money was for photocopying expenses to be incredible. The Court noted several inconsistencies: Pozar had already been given a specific list of required documents, making an unsolicited advance payment unnecessary; the money was concealed in an envelope without any explanatory note; and he failed to inquire about the money’s use when he had subsequent opportunities. These circumstances supported the inference of a corrupt intent to influence the Probation Officer regarding his application. However, for the crime of corruption under Article 212 of the Revised Penal Code to be consummated, the public official must accept the offer. Since Probation Officer Ocampo did not accept the money and instead took steps to return it, the crime was not consummated. Therefore, Pozar’s liability is only for an attempt to corrupt a public official. The penalty was accordingly reduced to two months and one day of arresto mayor.