THE Supreme Court has dismissed a court sheriff of the Imus City Regional Trial Court in Cavite for accepting P115,000 in bribe money in connection with a drug-related case.
In an en banc decision dated July 9, 2025, the SC not only dismissed Dwight Aldwin S. Geronimo from the service but also revoked his retirement benefits and permanently banned him from government reemployment.
Before his dismissal, Geronimo served as Sheriff IV of Branch 121 of the Imus City RTC.
Records of the case showed that Antolyn Dones Gonzales accused Geronimo of asking for P200, 000 in exchange for helping speed up the resolution of the drug case of her friend, Monib Saadoning Amatonding.
Gonzales said Geronimo told her the judge handling the case was his aunt and promised that Amatonding would be granted bail.
She said she paid Geronimo P115,000 initially, with the remaining amount to be paid after Amatonding’s case was settled.
But when Amatonding’s petition for bail was denied, Gonzales said Geronimo blocked her on Facebook and changed his mobile phone number.
In his defense, Geronimo initially told the Judicial Integrity Board (JIB) that the money was a personal loan.
Later, he claimed he was pretending to go along with Gonzales to expose alleged corruption in court.
But the JIB found him guilty of gross misconduct and ordered his dismissal from the service, a ruling the en banc agreed with.
“Geronimo admitted to receiving money from Gonzales as a personal loan. The SC ruled that this still violated Section 2 of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel because accepting money from someone with a pending case is prohibited, making his explanation irrelevant,” a press release issued by the SC PIO on the case stated.
Section 2 of the Code prohibited court personnel from accepting gifts that could influence their official action.
The en banc added that the messages that Geronimo did not deny sending to Gonzales support the claim that the money he received was related to a pending case.
“Due to the seriousness of Geronimo’s actions, as well as a previous record of misconduct, the SC imposed the ultimate penalty of dismissal,” the release added.
The SC has yet to release the full copy of the en banc decision as of press time.
