THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 243746. June 19, 2019.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.MONIB DIMAPORO, ADAM ASI, HERNANI A. REDOSENDO, CONSTANCIO CASSER, NARCISO CASSER, ROLANDO ORIG, CARLOS E. INDONG, SAIDONA KAYOG ABAS, SEKI BANSIAN, UBONG AKOY, BENIGNO LICUANAN DAGA, VICTORIO G. MORALES, SEMA LAMPONI, CAMLON Z. MAULANA, ABDULKADIL ABAS, MELENCIO SANGAMA, ANASTACIO ROXAS, and MADATU "MIKE" ALIUDIN, accused,
BENIGNO LICUANAN DAGA, accused appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution datedJune 19, 2019, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 243746 (PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee v. MONIB DIMAPORO, ADAM ASI, HERNANI A. REDOSENDO, CONSTANCIO CASSER, NARCISO CASSER, ROLANDO ORIG, CARLOS E. INDONG, SAIDONA KAYOG ABAS, SEKI BANSIAN, UBONG AKOY, BENIGNO LICUANAN DAGA, VICTORIO G. MORALES, SEMA LAMPONI, CAMLON Z. MAULANA, ABDULKADIL ABAS, MELENCIO SANGAMA, ANASTACIO ROXAS, and MADATU "MIKE" ALIUDIN, accused;BENIGNO LICUANAN DAGA, accused-appellant). — This Court resolves a Notice of Appeal 1 filed by accused-appellant Benigno Licuanan Daga (Daga), seeking the reversal of the Sandiganbayan's September 28, 2018 Decision in Criminal Case No. 24270.
In its September 28, 2018 Decision, 2 the Sandiganbayan convicted Daga and Saidona Kayog Abas of violation of Section 3 (e) of Republic Act No. 3019, or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. 3
Daga moved for reconsideration, but his Motion was denied by the Sandiganbayan in its December 14, 2018 Resolution. 4
Aggrieved, Daga filed a Notice of Appeal, 5 to which the Sandiganbayan gave due course in its January 14, 2019 Resolution. 6
On January 21, 2019, the case records were elevated to this Court 7
After an evaluation of the case records, this Court resolves to DISMISS the appeal of accused-appellant for his failure to sufficiently show any reversible error in the assailed September 28, 2018 Decision and December 14, 2018 Resolution of the Sandiganbayan, warranting the exercise of this Court's appellate jurisdiction.
WHEREFORE, the Sandiganbayan's September 28, 2018 Decision and December 14, 2018 Resolution in Criminal Case No. 24270 are AFFIRMED. Accused-appellant Benigno Licuanan Daga is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of violation of Section 3 (e) of Republic Act No. 3019. He is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment of six (6) years and one (1) month, as minimum, to ten (10) years, as maximum, with perpetual disqualification from holding public office. He is further DIRECTED to return the property or, in the event that the property can no longer be returned, to pay jointly and severally Virginia Cerezo-Besas or her heirs the value of the property.
In the meantime, let this case be ARCHIVED for the other accused who are still at large, to be revived upon their arrest or voluntary surrender.
SO ORDERED." (PeraltaandHernando, JJ., on official, leave.)
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITANDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 37-38.
2.Id. at 7-36. The Decision was penned by Associate Justice Reynaldo P. Cruz and, concurred in by Associate Justices Alex L. Quiroz and Bayani H. Jacinto of the Fourth Division, Sandiganbayan.
3. Republic Act No. 3019 (1960), sec. 3 provides:
SECTION 3. Corrupt practices of public officers. — In addition to acts or omissions of public officers already penalized by existing law, the following shall constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and are hereby declared to be unlawful:
(a) Persuading, inducing or influencing another public officer to perform an act constituting a violation of rules and regulations duly promulgated by competent authority or an offense in connection with the official duties of the latter, or allowing himself to be persuaded, induced, or influenced to commit such violation or offense.
(b) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present, share, percentage, or benefit, for himself or for any other person, in connection with any contract or transaction between the Government and any other party, wherein the public officer in his official capacity has to intervene under the law.
(c) Directly or indirectly requesting or receiving any gift, present or other pecuniary or material benefit, for himself or for another, from any person for whom the public officer, in any manner or capacity, has secured or obtained, or will secure or obtain, any Government permit or license, in consideration for the help given or to be given, without prejudice to Section thirteen of this Act.
(d) Accepting or having any member of his family accept employment in a private enterprise which has pending official business with him during the pendency thereof or within one year after its termination.
(e) Causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. This provision shall apply to officers and employees of offices or government corporations charged with the grant of licenses or permits or other concessions.
4.Rollo, p. 37.
5.Id. at 37-38.
6.Id. at 39.
7.Id. at 1-5.