Soriano v Sandiganbayan; G.R. No. L-65952; 31 Jul 1984; 131 SCRA 186

FACTS:
Petitioner, an Assistant City Fiscal, was assigned to investigate a complaint for qualified theft. In the course of said investigation, petitioner demanded money from a party litigant to the case in consideration for a favorable resolution thereof. Said litigant reported the demand to the National Bureau of Investigation and petitioner was arrested in an entrapment operation. An information was filed with the Sandiganbayan which found petitioner guilty of violating the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

ISSUE(S):
Whether or not petitioner was deprived of his right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him.

RULING:
NO. While the Court agreed that the Sandiganbayan erred in convicting petitioner of violating R.A. No. 3019, a reading of the information clearly makes out a case of bribery. Hence, petitioner cannot claim deprivation of the right to be informed.

Judgment of Sandiganbayan is MODIFIED, convicting petitioner with direct bribery.

Tags: , ,

Category: Legal Chyme

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *