Case Digest: People of the Philippines v. Ronald N. Ricketts and Glenn S. Perez G.R. No. 250867, March 16, 2022 Supreme Court, Second Division Ponente: Justice Ricardo R. Rosario

 

FACTS

Ronald N. Ricketts, then Chairman of the Optical Media Board (OMB), and Glenn S. Perez, an OMB Computer Operator, together with several co-accused, were charged before the Sandiganbayan with Violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act). The Information alleged that after OMB agents raided the warehouse of Sky High Marketing Corporation and confiscated 127 boxes and two sacks of pirated DVDs and VCDs, the accused unlawfully caused the release and reloading of the seized optical media into the corporation's vehicle, thereby giving the corporation an unwarranted benefit and compromising the evidence necessary for prosecution under Republic Act No. 9239 (Optical Media Act of 2003).

During trial, the prosecution presented evidence showing that on the evening of the raid, OMB security guard Pedro Gazzingan caught Perez loading the confiscated optical discs back into the seized vehicle without the required gate pass or written authority. When questioned, Perez allegedly stated that Chairman Ricketts had instructed him to remove the seized items from the OMB compound. The prosecution relied primarily on this statement to establish conspiracy between Ricketts and Perez.

The Sandiganbayan found both Ricketts and Perez guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violating Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019, ruling that they conspired to give unwarranted benefits to Sky High Marketing Corporation. Both accused appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the prosecution failed to establish conspiracy and failed to prove every element of the offense beyond reasonable doubt.

ISSUE

Whether or not the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Ronald N. Ricketts conspired with Glenn S. Perez in committing Violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019.

Whether or not the statement allegedly made by Perez to the security guard was sufficient to establish conspiracy and criminal liability on the part of Ricketts.

Whether or not the prosecution sufficiently established the elements of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 against Perez, thereby warranting his conviction.

HELD

The Supreme Court GRANTED the appeal of Ronald N. Ricketts but AFFIRMED the conviction of Glenn S. Perez. The Court held that the prosecution failed to prove Ricketts' guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Under Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019, the prosecution must establish that the accused is a public officer who acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith, or gross inexcusable negligence, thereby causing undue injury to the government or giving a private party an unwarranted benefit. Likewise, conspiracy must be proved by clear and convincing evidence showing a common design and coordinated acts toward the commission of the offense. Mere suspicion or hearsay cannot sustain a conviction.

The Court ruled that the only evidence linking Ricketts to the unlawful release of the seized optical media was Perez's alleged statement to the security guard that he was acting upon Ricketts' instruction. The Court explained that while the testimony was admissible to prove that Perez made such a statement, it was not admissible to prove the truth of the statement itself. Consequently, it could not establish that Ricketts actually ordered the release of the confiscated items or that he conspired with Perez. The prosecution therefore failed to overcome the constitutional presumption of innocence, and Ricketts was acquitted.

As to Glenn S. Perez, however, the Court found that the prosecution proved all the elements of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019. Perez was caught in flagrante delicto removing the confiscated DVDs and VCDs from the OMB compound without the required written authorization or gate pass. His unauthorized act directly gave Sky High Marketing Corporation an unwarranted benefit by returning the seized evidence and compromising the government's ability to prosecute violations of Republic Act No. 9239 (Optical Media Act of 2003). His explanations did not negate his evident bad faith nor excuse his unauthorized conduct.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court ACQUITTED Ronald N. Ricketts for failure of the prosecution to prove conspiracy and his guilt beyond reasonable doubt, ordered the lifting of the Hold Departure Order against him, and directed the release of his cash bond. On the other hand, it AFFIRMED the Sandiganbayan's conviction of Glenn S. Perez, including the penalty of imprisonment of six (6) years and one (1) day as minimum to eight (8) years as maximum, with perpetual disqualification from public office, for violating Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019.