Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 40 views

    F1iii - 1 SC v. Delgado

    Uploaded by

    Aaron Ariston
    This case involves three employees - Delgado, Madeja, and Florendo - who were accused of removing pages from a sealed court document without authorization. [1] Delgado admitted to removing the pages at the request of Madeja and Florendo. [2] Madeja and Florendo initially also admitted to requesting the pages but later denied it. [3] The court found Delgado's testimony credible and that Madeja and Florendo's denial was unsubstantiated, so their guilt was proved by clear and convincing evidence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    F1iii - 1 SC v. Delgado

    Uploaded by

    Aaron Ariston
    40 views2 pages
    This case involves three employees - Delgado, Madeja, and Florendo - who were accused of removing pages from a sealed court document without authorization. [1] Delgado admitted to removing the pages at the request of Madeja and Florendo. [2] Madeja and Florendo initially also admitted to requesting the pages but later denied it. [3] The court found Delgado's testimony credible and that Madeja and Florendo's denial was unsubstantiated, so their guilt was proved by clear and convincing evidence.

    Original Description:

    Evidence

    Original Title

    F1iii- 1 SC v. Delgado

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involves three employees - Delgado, Madeja, and Florendo - who were accused of removing pages from a sealed court document without authorization. [1] Delgado admitted to removing the pages at the request of Madeja and Florendo. [2] Madeja and Florendo initially also admitted to requesting the pages but later denied it. [3] The court found Delgado's testimony credible and that Madeja and Florendo's denial was unsubstantiated, so their guilt was proved by clear and convincing evidence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    40 views2 pages

    F1iii - 1 SC v. Delgado

    Uploaded by

    Aaron Ariston
    This case involves three employees - Delgado, Madeja, and Florendo - who were accused of removing pages from a sealed court document without authorization. [1] Delgado admitted to removing the pages at the request of Madeja and Florendo. [2] Madeja and Florendo initially also admitted to requesting the pages but later denied it. [3] The court found Delgado's testimony credible and that Madeja and Florendo's denial was unsubstantiated, so their guilt was proved by clear and convincing evidence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence: Clear and Convincing

    SC v. Delgado
    AM No. 2011-07-SC
    Oct 4, 2011

    PER CURIAM:

    FACTS:
    This is an administrative case stemmed from the Memorandum issued by the Complaints and
    Investigation Division of the Office of Administrative Services (OAS) against respondents Eddie V. Delgado
    (Delgado), Wilfredo Florendo (Florendo), and Joseph Madeja (Madeja) who are utility workers and clerk
    IV in the Office of the Clerk Of Court, Second Division (OCC-SD) for allegedly participating in removing
    some pages from one of the sealed Agenda without authority to do so. The OAS found Delgado guilty of
    grave misconduct and recommended his dismissal from service, on the other hand, Madeja and Wilfredo
    are found guilty of Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service and OAS recommended for their
    6-month suspension.

    Ms. Christine Puno (Ms. Puno) of the OCC-SD asked Mr. Irving Tanael to photocopy the sealed
    agenda (the May 30, 2011 Agenda) from the office of SC Associate Justice and Second Division
    Chairperson Antonio T. Carpio in two copies. Subsequently, the finished copies were given to herein
    respondent Delgado for stitching. Ms. Puno caught Delgado acting suspiciously and began to suspect that
    respondent Delgado might have been taken some pages from the copies of the Agenda.
    - She saw Delgado placing some pink papers in his drawers.

    Thereafter, OCC-SD Clerk of Court Atty. Ma. Luisa Laurea ordered an initial investigation and called the
    involved personnel for an initial investigation.

    During the initial investigation, Delgado candidly admitted that he took pages from the one of the
    Agenda. However, respondent Delgado also disclosed that he removed the pages from the subject Agenda
    only as a favor to herein respondents Madeja and Florendo. Respondents Madeja and Florendo that they
    asked for and, in fact, obtained the missing pages in the 30 May 2011 Agenda. Both respondents Madeja
    and Florendo attested that court employees from other Divisions had been requesting for copies of the
    Agenda, to which they were inclined to accede in exchange for tokens like pang-merienda or pamasahe.
    A memorandum was then submitted to Justice Carpio.

    Pursuant to a Resolution issued by the Court, the OAS conducted a formal investigation wherein,
    respondents Madeja and Florendo adamantly denied having made any admission during the initial
    investigation. They submit that there is no actual evidence that shows that they have knowledge of or
    involvement in the actions of respondent Delgado.
    On the other hand, respondent Delgado in his statement during the formal hearings, on the other hand,
    stood by his admissions during the initial investigation.

    ISSUE:
    Whether the guilt of Majeda and Florendo were proved through clear and convincing evidence
    HELD:
    Yes.

    First. Respondent Delgados statements, not only in the initial investigation but also in the formal
    investigation, were unwavering in their implication of respondents Madeja and Florendo. Respondent
    Delgado categorically identified respondents Madeja and Florendo as the persons who induced him to
    remove several pages from a copy of the 30 May 2011 Agenda and thereafter obtained them.

    Second. It was never shown that respondent Delgado was motivated by any ill will in implicating
    respondents Madeja and Florendo. As a witness, the credibility of respondent Delgado remained
    unsullied. We find his statements worthy of belief.[66]

    Third. The unsubstantiated denial of respondents, therefore, falters in light of the direct and positive
    statements of respondent Delgado. The basic principle in Evidence is that denials, unless supported by
    clear and convincing evidence, cannot prevail over the affirmative testimony of truthful witnesses

    You might also like