GR L 4758; (February, 1909) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-4758
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. T. E. SANTOS, defendant-appellant.
February 16, 1909
FACTS:
Teodoro E. Santos, the municipal treasurer of Polo and deputy provincial treasurer of Bulacan, was inspected by J.P. Fitzgerald on July 30, 1907. Santos admitted that P300 was with Pio Valenzuela for the purpose of exchanging old coinage, which was subsequently recovered. An initial check revealed a shortage of P52.93, which Santos explained as P50 being with Gualberto Santos for exchange (later refunded) and P2.93 due to an accounting error.
A few days later, a more thorough examination, conducted in Santos’ absence, showed a remaining shortage of P15.85. Santos had previously been warned by the district auditor and provincial treasurer against withdrawing funds from the municipal safe or entrusting municipal funds to friends for exchange, under threat of legal action. Santos maintained that his actions were in compliance with circular orders to collect old issue coins through exchange.
The trial court found Santos guilty, sentencing him to fourteen months of prision correccional, suspension from public office, a fine, and a refund of P15.85. Santos appealed.
ISSUE:
Was the evidence sufficient to prove Teodoro E. Santos’ guilt for misappropriation of public funds beyond a reasonable doubt?
RULING:
No. The Supreme Court acquitted Teodoro E. Santos.
1. Regarding the P350 (P300 + P50) for exchange: The Court found no evidence of misappropriation. Santos disposed of the money not for personal benefit or an improper purpose, but with the lawful intent to facilitate an administrative measure, which was the withdrawal of old issue coins. The money was either recovered or refunded.
2. Regarding the P15.85 shortage: The evidence presented was not conclusive or satisfactory to prove misappropriation. The initial report on July 30, made in Santos’ presence, showed a shortage of P352.93, which he accounted for. However, the subsequent report of August 5, which indicated the P15.85 shortage, was made in Santos’ absence, and he did not agree to its results. The Court held that it could only accept the report made in the accused’s presence, as the later report was not properly validated against him, nor was the earlier report shown to be incorrect.
Therefore, the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The presumption of innocence prevailed.