By JOSEPH G. LARIOSA

(© Journal Group Link International)

Convicted Filipino Priest Invokes Separation of Church and State

C HICAGO (jGLi) – Convicted Filipino priest Rodney Lee Rodis has asked the Supreme Court of Virginia in Richmond to dismiss the embezzlement case filed against him by the Commonwealth of Virginia, invoking his First Amendment right on the separation of church and state.

At the same time, Rodis, 54, and a native of Cagayan de Oro city in the Philippines, told the state’s highest court that the Court of Appeals of Virginia “erred in affirming the trial court’s denial” of his right against prosecution barred by Virginia Code as a subsequent prosecution for the same criminal acts.

Citing the United States Supreme Court ruling in Watson v. Jones (1871), Rodis told the Supreme Court of Virginia that “it is impermissible for secular courts, such as those of the Commonwealth of Virginia, to get involved in disputes that involve the interpretation of church law relating to internal governance, doctrine, etc.”

Saying that secular courts do not have jurisdiction to hear his case, Rodis thru his lawyer John “Jack” R. Maus invoked the holding of the U.S. Supreme Court that “whenever the questions of discipline or faith, or ecclesiastical rule, custom or law have been decided by the highest of these church judicatories to which the matter has been carried, the legal tribunals must accept such decisions as final, and as binding on them, in their application to the case before them.”

Even on occasions when secular courts may become involved in church-related property disputes, the U.S. Supreme Court in a related case, Kedroff v. St. Nicholas Cathedral (1952), even “strengthened” Watson’s “deferment rule,” where “an incident from decisions of the church custom or law on ecclesiastical issues, the church rule controls.”

The next question that needs to be resolved in this case was whether the funds that came into Rodis’ possession were received for The Catholic Diocese of Richmond, which is alleged in the indictment to be Fr. Rodis’ principal and employer, or whether, they were received for the two parishes to which the checks were made payable and which Rodis served.

The checks that were alleged to have been embezzled by Rodis were made payable to the individual churches and not to the Catholic Diocese of Richmond. And it would be impossible to determine who was the actual “victim” of embezzlement without delving into church law.

However, when Rodis’ successor, Fr. Duffy, was asked who those checks belonged to, his response was the Bishop of the Catholic Diocese of Richmond.

A case that was on “all fours” with Rodis was the State v. Burckhard (1999) that involved a Catholic parish priest being charged with embezzlement of more than $100,000 of funds contributed to St. Catherine’s Church in Valley City, North Dakota. The Barnes County District Court granted Fr. Burckhard’s motion to dismiss the charge against him based on the lack of subject matter jurisdiction, a decision that initially split the North Dakota Supreme Court.

When the case was remanded to the Barnes County District Court to clarify the Bishop’s letter on the scope of Fr. Burckhard’s authority, the court again dismissed the case against Burckhard. When the State again appealed, the North Dakota Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s dismissal of indictment against Burkhard, “finding that it could not resolve the issue of Burckhard’s authority without impermissibly delving into matters relating to church governance and interpretation and application of church (canon) law.”

In Rodis’ case, there was an allegation that he embezzled from the Catholic Diocese of Richmond. The proof was that the checks he took were payable to the two individual churches where he served as their pastor. The only proof that the checks actually belonged to another was the testimony that church law so provides.

Rodis was accused of embezzling nearly $1-million from collections from St. Jude Catholic Church in Mineral and Immaculate Conception Church in Bumpass, both in Virginia, and both under the Diocese of Richmond.

Rodis also insisted that when the federal court prosecuted him for the same acts for which he was subsequently tried in state court, this violated Virginia Code §19.2-294 that bars such a subsequent prosecution.

Court records show that Rodis opened an unauthorized bank account in September, 1995. He maintained control of a post office box opened in 1998. During the period from September 2002 thru August 2006, he engaged in scheme to defraud his parishioners by soliciting funds from them, by having them sent to the post office box, by depositing them in an unauthorized account and by diverting those funds to his own use.

The ten counts of the indictment on which Rodis was tried contained offense dates from April 1, 2003 to Jan. 31, 2006, that was the basis of his federal guilty plea.

Rodis also argues that the Commonwealth of Virginia failed to prove that the Catholic Diocese of Richmond was the victim of the embezzlement. It only proved that the checks were payable to two churches, St. Jude and Immaculate Conception.

Rodis also claims that he is not employed by the Catholic Diocese of Richmond but was merely “assigned” to his parishes by the Bishop, who gave Rodis a “Letter of Administration.” Rodis’ employers were the two parishes, which paid him.

Rodis also moved to strike Commonwealth’s evidence as to Counts 2 thru 10 under the “single larceny” theory. Although, the embezzlements continued for a period of several years, they were part of one criminal scheme and should have been punished as one offense rather than ten offenses.

As a result, after the two-day jury trial on Oct. 29 and 30, 2008, before the Louisa County Circuit Court, Rodis was found guilty of all 10 counts of indictment and recommended the maximum possible sentence, that is, 20 years on each count, for a total of 200 years.

While the state-level indictments were pending, the U.S. federal government charged Rodis with multiple federal offenses arising from the same scheme of fraud. The state charges were “nolle prossed” (prosecution was stopped) in deference to the federal prosecution.

Rodis was convicted in federal court on Oct. 26, 2007, of mail fraud and money laundering under a plea agreement. However, the active sentence that he received in federal court did not satisfy Rodis’ former parishioners or the challenger for the office of Commonwealth’s Attorney for Louisa County.

When the challenger was elected, Rodis was re-indicted by a grand jury for the Louisa County Circuit on a 13-count indictment, charging him with embezzlement. # # #

Editor’s Note: To contact the author, please e-mail him at:  (lariosa_jos@sbcglobal.net)