Scribd
Upload
640 views1 page

Navallo vs. Sandiganbayan

Ernesto Navallo was charged with malversation as the Collecting and Disbursing Officer of Numancia National Vocational School. He claimed he was pressured into signing cash reports by his superior and the collections were actually his superior's responsibility. However, the court ruled that an audit is not a custodial investigation so his constitutional rights did not apply. Additionally, the court determined he was not truly pressured but may have been persuaded to sign the reports. Therefore, his defense was rejected.

Uploaded by

Dana Denisse Ricaplaza
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
640 views1 page

Navallo vs. Sandiganbayan

Ernesto Navallo was charged with malversation as the Collecting and Disbursing Officer of Numancia National Vocational School. He claimed he was pressured into signing cash reports by his superior and the collections were actually his superior's responsibility. However, the court ruled that an audit is not a custodial investigation so his constitutional rights did not apply. Additionally, the court determined he was not truly pressured but may have been persuaded to sign the reports. Therefore, his defense was rejected.

Uploaded by

Dana Denisse Ricaplaza
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/ 1

Navallo vs.

Sandiganbayan
G.R. No. 97214, July 18, 1994

Facts:
Petitioner Ernesto Navallo, as the Collecting and Disbursing Officer of Numancia National
Vocational School was charged of malversation. A warrant of arrest was issued, but he was not
immediately found. When he was finally arrested, he posted bail bond. When arraigned by the
Regional Trial Court, he pleaded not guilty.

In his defense, he contend that he have been deprived of his constitutional rights under Section
12, Article III, of the 1987 Constitution. He claimed that signed the cash count only because he
was pressured by Macasemo who assured him that Macasemo would settle everything. The
collections in 1976, reflected in the Statement of Accountability, were not his but those of
Macasemo, his superior, who had unliquidated cash advances. He also admitted having
received the demand letter but he did not reply because he was already in Manila looking for
another employment. He was in Manila when the case was filed against him. He did not exert
any effort to have Macasemo appear in the preliminary investigation, relying instead on
Macasemo's assurance that he would settle the matter.

Issue:
Whether or not petitioner was under custodial investigation when he signed the certification
prepared by State Auditing Examiner
Ruling:
No, A person under a normal audit examination is not under custodial investigation. An audit
examiner himself can hardly be deemed to be the law enforcement officer. Thus he cannot
invoke such right for he was not under custodial investigation. Furthermore, it cannot be said
that he has been pressured to sign the auditors report, but may have been persuaded only.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy