Criminal Law - Ambil, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 175457, July 6, 2011

Case Digests G.R. NO. 175457: July 6, 2011 RUPERTO A. AMBIL, JR. , Petitioner , v. SANDIGANBAYAN and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES , Respondent . VILLARAMA, JR.,  J .: .: FACTS:

Mayor Francisco Andalim (Mayor Andalim) was the accused in a murder case. During the trial, Mayor Andalim was transferred from the provincial jail of Eastern Samar to the residence of Governor Ruperto A. Ambil Jr. (Gov. Ambil). The NBI conducted an investigation and recommended that charges be filed against Gov. Ambil for violation of R.A. No 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The IBP, which initially requested investigation in the case, dismissed their request and informed the Ombudsman they would no longer pursue the case. The Office of the Ombudsman charged Gov. Ambil and Alexandrino Apelado, Sr. for violation of Sec. 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 and Art. 156 of the Revised Penal Code. The Sandiganbayan First Division found Gov. Ambil and Apelado, Sr. liable. ISSUE:

Whether or not the accused are liable for violation of R.A. No 3019. HELD:

CRIMINAL LAW: violation of the Anti-Graft Act Without a court order, petitioners transferred Adalim and detained him in a place other than the provincial jail.The latter was housed in much more comfortable quarters, provided better nourishment, was free to move about the house and watch television.Petitioners readily extended these benefits to Adalim on the mere representation of his lawyers that the mayor life would be put in danger inside the provincial jail. As the Sandiganbayan ruled, however, petitioners were unable to establish the existence of any risk on Adalim safety. As held by the Court in Sison v. People , in order to be found guilty under the second mode, it suffices that the accused has given unjustified favor or benefit to another in the exercise of his official, administrative or judicial functions. Petition is DENIED.