G.R. No. P-91-621 November 10, 2004
Office of the Court Administrator vs. Virgilio G. Cañete

FACTS

Respondent Virgilio G. Cañete, a Stenographic Reporter, was administratively charged with Grave Misconduct for the alleged theft of a Colt Commander 9mm pistol, an exhibit in Criminal Case No. 2221, from a locked wooden cabinet in the chambers of Judge Marcelo B. Rabosa. The firearm, turned over to Clerk of Court Fely C. Carriedo in January 1990, was discovered missing on October 19, 1990. Carriedo reported that although she held the only key, she would sometimes leave the cabinet unlocked on Fridays per a long-standing arrangement with Cañete, who performed skeletal work on Saturdays and needed access to records and supplies stored therein. Cañete had transferred to another branch on September 24, 1990.
The charge was based on circumstantial evidence, including affidavits from co-workers. One attested to seeing Cañete with a gun tucked in his waist in August 1990. Another claimed to have seen him hurriedly carrying a torn brown envelope with a gun handle protruding. Others stated only Carriedo and Cañete had access to the cabinet. An aide alleged he overheard Cañete discussing with a soldier about a general wanting a firearm back. Cañete denied the allegations, presenting an alibi for August 25, 1990, and claiming the affidavits were coached. He was also acquitted in a related criminal case for theft.

ISSUE

Whether substantial evidence exists to hold respondent Virgilio G. Cañete administratively liable for Grave Misconduct for the loss of the court exhibit.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court dismissed the administrative complaint for insufficiency of evidence. In administrative proceedings, the burden of proof rests on the complainant, and a finding of guilt must be supported by substantial evidence, or such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. The Court found the evidence against Cañete merely circumstantial and insufficient to meet this standard.
The affidavits presented were deemed unreliable. The claim of seeing a gun handle through a torn envelope was considered improbable, as Cañete would not have been so careless. The allegation about a conversation with a soldier was hearsay. The Court noted that the loss could have occurred anytime over a ten-month period and that responsibility for the safekeeping of exhibits primarily rested with the Clerk of Court, Fely C. Carriedo, who had already been disciplined in a separate matter for infidelity in the custody of exhibits. Cañete’s mere access to the cabinet and his subsequent attempts to help locate the firearm did not constitute substantial proof of misconduct. Without clear and convincing evidence, the presumption of innocence and the requirement for substantial evidence compelled dismissal. The Court ordered Carriedo to show cause for the loss.