Scribd
Upload
62 views2 pages

(G.R. No. L-6201. April 20, 1954.) : People vs. Livara

- The defendant, Felipe A. Livara, was a provincial disbursing officer for the Philippine Constabulary in Romblon from 1947-1948. - In November 1948, an audit found he had an unaccounted shortage of P9,597 in his accounts. He was charged with malversation of public funds. - At trial in the Court of First Instance of Romblon, he was found guilty and sentenced. He appealed, arguing the court did not have jurisdiction and challenging the constitutionality of Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code.

Uploaded by

Yanne Arias
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
62 views2 pages

(G.R. No. L-6201. April 20, 1954.) : People vs. Livara

- The defendant, Felipe A. Livara, was a provincial disbursing officer for the Philippine Constabulary in Romblon from 1947-1948. - In November 1948, an audit found he had an unaccounted shortage of P9,597 in his accounts. He was charged with malversation of public funds. - At trial in the Court of First Instance of Romblon, he was found guilty and sentenced. He appealed, arguing the court did not have jurisdiction and challenging the constitutionality of Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code.

Uploaded by

Yanne Arias
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

PEOPLE VS.

LIVARA government in the sum of P9,597, without subsidiary imprisonment in case


[G.R. No. L-6201. April 20, 1954.] of insolvency, and to pay the costs. From this judgment he appealed on
time. Because he assailed the constitutionality of Article 217 of the Revised
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. FELIPE A. Penal Code, the expediente was forwarded to this Court.
LIVARA, Defendant-Appellant.
Appellant was from January, 1947 to July 22, 1948, provincial disbursing
Solicitor General Pompeyo Diaz and Solicitor Isidro C. Borromeo
officer of the Philippine Constabulary in Romblon. As finance and
for Appellee.
accountable officer, he took charge of paying the salaries and subsistence
Marcelino Lontok for Appellant. of the PC officers and enlisted men of that region. On July 22,1948, he
came to Manila carrying some money, and, having secured a Treasury
SYLLABUS Warrant from the finance officer at Camp Crame for more than P8,000, he
1. JURISDICTION OF COURTS; CIVIL COURT AND COURTS-MARTIAL. cashed the same in the Finance Building at Taft Avenue. In November,
— The civil courts and courts-martial have concurrent jurisdiction over 1948, an examination of his accounts was conducted by Major Emilio
offenses committed by a member of the Armed Forces in violation of Baldia, Chief of the Cash Examination and Inspection Branch of the
military law and the public law. The first court to take cognizance of the Finance Service, who found him with a net shortage of P9,597
case does so to the exclusion of the other. unaccounted for. Major Baldia submitted a report of his findings to the
Adjutant General of the PC. Days afterwards, a board of officers was
2. CRIMINAL LAW; CONSTITUTIONALITY OF ARTICLE 217 OF THE created formally to investigate the appellant. That board found him
REVISED PENAL CODE. — The presumption provided for in article 217 of
accountable for P9,597, and recommended his prosecution before the civil
the Revised Penal Code is not unconstitutional. There is no constitutional
courts for malversation of public funds. An information for the crime of
objection to the passage of a law providing that the presumption of
innocence may be overcome by a contrary presumption founded upon the malversation of public funds was consequently filed in the Court of First
experience of human conduct, and enacting what evidence shall be Instance of Romblon September 10, 1949.
sufficient to overcome such presumption of innocence. "The failure of a
public officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or property with Major Emilio Baldia, testified in the Romblon court that sometime in
which he is chargeable upon demand by any duly authorized officer, shall November 6, 1948, he examined the accountability of Lieutenant Felipe A.
be prima facie evidence that he has put such missing funds or property to Livara and found he had incurred a net shortage of P9,597; and that in
personal uses." answer to his question, appellant admitted his financial liability but asserted
he had lost the money in Manila on his way to North Harbor to board a
DECISION
vessel for Romblon.

BENGZON, J.: Capt. Teofilo V. Dayao, Zone Finance Officer, testified that in the month of
August, 1948, he was dispatched to Romblon to pay the salaries and
subsistence of the officers and enlisted men of the PC stationed in said
After the corresponding trial in the Court of First Instance of Romblon, province; that he inquired into the whereabouts of Lt. Livara but was
Felipe A. Livara, was found guilty of malversation of public funds and informed that he had left for Manila in July 23, 1948, to submit for approval
sentenced to imprisonment from four (4) years, two . (2) months and one the disbursement he had made and get the return of the same from the PC
(1) day of prision correccional to ten (10) years of prision mayor, with headquarters; that finding the safe of the accused locked, he sealed it in
perpetual special disqualification, to pay a fine of P5,000, to indemnify the the presence of Capt. Diaz and Lt. Tañedo and brought it to Manila where it
was opened in the presence of eleven officers including the appellant; and Romblon had no jurisdiction over the case, arguing that the alleged crime
that no cash was found in the safe. of malversation of public funds occurred during the incumbency of the
accused as an officer of the Philippine Constabulary. Such contention is
Provincial Auditor Aproniano S. Celajes, last prosecution witness, declared without merit. The civil courts and courts-martial have concurrent
that on July 16, 1948, he examined and verified the books of account and jurisdiction over offenses committed by a member of the Armed Forces in
money accountability of the appellant and found a balance of P14,984, violation of military law and the public law. The first court to take
represented by cash of P6,330.10, actually found on hand and vouchers in cognizance of the case does so to the exclusion of the other (Grafton v. U.
the amount of P8,654. S., 11 Phil., 776; Valdez v. Lucero, 42 Off. Gaz., No. 112835). The
accused-appellant having been first tried and convicted of the crime by the
The appellant Felipe A. Livara was the lone witness for the defense. He Court of First Instance of Romblon he cannot now claim that the criminal
declared that on July 22, 1948, he came to Manila and submitted his action should have been brought before a court-martial.
abstract to the Auditor of the PC; that a treasury warrant was issued to him
in the amount of more than P8,000; that he proceeded to the Finance The constitutionality of the last paragraph of Article 217 of the Revised
Building at Taft Avenue and cashed the same; that while riding a public Penal Code is likewise assailed. It reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
utility jeepney bound for the North Harbor to embark on the S. S. Elena for
Romblon, he lost his portfolio containing the said money plus about P1,000 "The failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or
more, and other public documents. He swore to having made efforts to property with which he is chargeable, upon demand by any duly authorized
recover the portfolio but the jeepney was nowhere to be found. officer, shall be prima facie evidence that he has put such missing funds or
property to personal uses."cralaw virtua1aw library
There is no doubt about the shortage. It constitutes prima facie evidence
that the accused made personal use of the money, unless he gives a Defense counsel maintains the view that this provision is contrary to the
satisfactory explanation (Art. 217, Rev. Penal Code). His account of the constitutional directive that in criminal prosecutions the accused shall be
loss of the portfolio was not believed by the board officers that investigated presumed innocent until the contrary is proven.
him, and by the court below. It is really an incredible story. With about ten
thousand pesos in it, the portfolio could not have been forgotten for one This contention deserves no merit, inasmuch as the validity of the said
moment by any passenger, especially a finance officer like the accused. article has already been discussed and upheld in People v. Mingoa, 92
The alleged loss was obviously a ruse to conceal his defalcations. As a Phil., 856, wherein this court through Mr. Justice Reyes declared: "there is
matter of fact, even before the Manila trip he was already in the red, as no constitutional objection to the passage of a law providing that the
shown by the testimonies of Lt. Bernabe Cadiz, commanding officer of the presumption of innocence may be overcome by a contrary presumption
83rd PC company and Lt. Damaso C. Quiao, adjutant, supply and finance founded upon the experience of human conduct, and enacting what
officer, of Romblon. evidence shall be sufficient to overcome such presumption of
innocence."cralaw virtua1aw library
If the portfolio had actually been lost as recounted by appellant, he would
not be responsible for the money. Yet he admitted his liability, made efforts Wherefore, as this appellant is guilty of malversation of public funds and as
to pay it, even used for that purpose a false check payable to Colonel the penalty imposed on him accords with the law, we hereby affirm the
Selga of the Constabulary. judgment with costs against him. So ordered.

Paras, C.J., Pablo, Bengzon, Montemayor, Reyes, Jugo, Bautista Angelo, Concepcion and Diokno, JJ., concur.
Counsel for the appellant contends that the Court of First Instance of

You might also like