G.R. No. P-02-1665. September 13, 2006
Office of the Court Administrator vs. Edwin N. Latayan, Sheriff IV, RTC, Branch 107, Quezon City

FACTS

Respondent Edwin N. Latayan, Sheriff IV of RTC Branch 107, Quezon City, was tasked to implement writs of execution against Summit Guaranty and Insurance Company, Inc. (SGIC) for forfeited bonds totaling P80,000. In July and August 2002, respondent telephoned SGIC Marketing Officer Jennifer Baldueza, demanding P25,000 in exchange for concealing one writ, later agreeing to accept P4,000 initially. SGIC, through Baldueza and clerk Maria Victoria Lim, reported this to the PNP-CIDG, which organized an entrapment operation on August 21, 2002. Respondent was arrested after receiving the marked money from Lim. He was criminally charged for robbery-extortion.
Presiding Judge Rosalina L. Pison, upon learning of respondent’s absence and arrest, requested his suspension. Respondent submitted but later withdrew a resignation letter. The Court suspended him pending the criminal case. In his comment, respondent denied extortion, claiming the P4,000 was a partial payment for SGIC’s bond obligation collected pursuant to a court order.

ISSUE

Whether respondent is administratively liable for dishonesty in the performance of his official duties.

RULING

Yes, respondent is guilty of dishonesty and is dismissed from service. The Court upheld the findings of the Investigating Judge, rejecting respondent’s defense. The legal logic is clear: sheriffs are strictly prohibited from directly receiving payments from parties in the course of implementing writs of execution, as this practice is inherently susceptible to abuse and corruption. Proper procedure requires that payments for judicial bonds be made directly to the Office of the Clerk of Court, not to the sheriff. Respondent’s failure to issue an official receipt immediately upon receiving the money strongly indicates the payment was unofficial and illicit, not a legitimate collection.
His actions—soliciting money in exchange for not serving a writ and receiving marked bills in an entrapment—constitute dishonesty, a grave offense under the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases. This conduct violates the high ethical standards required of court personnel who are in close contact with the public and are vital to maintaining trust in the judiciary. The penalty of dismissal with forfeiture of benefits and perpetual disqualification from government service is imposed to preserve the integrity of judicial administration and serve as a deterrent. The administrative liability stands independently of the pending criminal case.