G.R. No. A.M. No. P-92-1-029 RTC November 16, 1993
RE: REPORT OF JUDGE ENRIQUE JOCSON REGARDING DEFECTIVE PROPERTY BONDS: RAMIRO J. MENDOZA, Legal Researcher, Regional Trial Court, Branch 47, Bacolod City, respondent.

FACTS

This administrative case stems from the approval by former Judge Enrique T. Jocson of three property bonds bearing forged certifications from the Register of Deeds, Acting Treasurer, and Deputy City Assessor of Bago City. The bonds were submitted to Judge Jocson at his residence on a Sunday by his Legal Researcher, respondent Ramiro J. Mendoza, for criminal cases not yet raffled. Upon examination, a Clerk of Court suspected the certifications were fake, which was confirmed when the Register of Deeds disclaimed his signature. Judge Jocson subsequently issued orders for the re-arrest of the accused. An investigation by the PNP concluded that Dominador Labansawan and respondent Mendoza had committed falsification. Criminal charges were filed with the Ombudsman, which found sufficient evidence against Labansawan but recommended dismissal of charges against Mendoza, subjecting him instead to administrative action for improper and negligent behavior. The Supreme Court referred the matter for investigation. The investigating judge found the bail bonds were based on forged documents, with signatories and positions being fictitious, and noted Mendoza appeared evasive during interrogation, concluding fraud was perpetrated through connivance. However, the Supreme Court’s scrutiny of the records found no direct or substantial evidence of Mendoza’s participation in the falsification or that he knew the documents were falsified. It was noted that fake bail bonds had been a recurring problem in Bacolod City, attributed to a syndicate, and the Ombudsman’s resolution cleared Mendoza of criminal conspiracy, holding only Labansawan liable.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Ramiro J. Mendoza is administratively liable for his actions in connection with the submission and approval of the defective property bonds.

RULING

Yes, but only for negligence, not for conspiracy or falsification. The Supreme Court found respondent Ramiro J. Mendoza guilty of negligence in the performance of his duties. The Court agreed with the Ombudsman’s finding that there was no evidence of criminal complicity or conspiracy with Labansawan. However, Mendoza failed to exercise the “utmost care” required in scrutinizing property bonds as prescribed in the Manual for Clerks of Court. His over thirty years of court experience should have made him more scrupulous. The Court noted that greater responsibility lay with the Presiding Judge for approving the bonds, but Mendoza, though only a Legal Researcher temporarily acting for the absent Branch Clerk, was still accountable. Considering his long, previously untainted service in mitigation, the penalty imposed was a two-month suspension without pay, with a stern warning for any future similar acts.