G.R. No.: A.M. No. P-09-2710 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 07-2607-P)
Date: July 27, 2021

Case Parties: Cirilo P. Tirado, Sr. and Edna S. Casiple, Complainants, vs. Yanena D. Portillano, Clerk of Court II, 3rd Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Bagumbayan-Esperanza, Sultan Kudarat, Respondent.

FACTS

Complainants Cirilo P. Tirado, Sr. (an accused in two criminal cases for robbery) and Edna S. Casiple (his bondswoman) filed a verified complaint for misconduct against respondent Yanena D. Portillano, Clerk of Court II. Casiple had posted a total cash bail bond of ₱80,000.00 with respondent for Tirado’s provisional liberty. After the cases were filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 19, the court granted Tirado’s motion to reduce his bail to ₱20,000.00 per case. Tirado’s counsel then requested respondent to release ₱40,000.00, but she refused, citing that the reduction order did not specifically authorize release to Casiple. The RTC subsequently issued an Order dated June 26, 2007, directing respondent to release the entire ₱80,000.00 cash bond to the RTC Clerk of Court, Atty. Heathcliff H. Leal, who would then issue new bonds for ₱40,000.00 and refund the remaining ₱40,000.00 to Casiple. Complainants attempted to serve this order but were informed respondent was on leave. Respondent eventually remitted the amount on July 17, 2007, claiming the delay was due to her inquiring with the auditor on partial refund procedures and attending to her sick son. An investigation by the Executive Judge found that respondent failed to deposit the cash bond with the court’s authorized depositary bank immediately upon receipt, and her delayed compliance with the court order gave rise to a presumption of misappropriation.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Yanena D. Portillano is administratively liable for her actions concerning the custody and release of the cash bail bond.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court found respondent guilty of Dishonesty, Grave Misconduct, and Gross Neglect of Duty. The Court adopted the factual findings of the investigation and the Office of the Court Administrator’s (OCA) recommendation, with modification. Respondent, as Clerk of Court and custodian of court funds, violated mandatory circulars (Supreme Court Circular Nos. 13-92 and 50-95) which require immediate deposit of fiduciary collections, like bail bonds, with an authorized government depositary bank within twenty-four hours of receipt. Her failure to immediately release the funds pursuant to the June 26, 2007 RTC Order, and her inability to account for the money’s whereabouts during the delay, constituted prima facie evidence of misappropriation, which she failed to rebut. Her justifications (pending auditor inquiry, personal problems) were insufficient and unsupported by proof. The act of misappropriating judicial funds is not only dishonesty but also constitutes grave misconduct and gross neglect of duty. The Court emphasized that such conduct undermines the integrity of the judiciary. Although respondent had resigned, resignation does not evade administrative liability. The Court imposed the penalty of perpetual disqualification from re-employment in any government branch and forfeiture of all benefits, except accrued leave credits.