This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2013-12-02 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| Again, in Bartolo v. Sandiganbayan, Second Division,[31] the Court citing Bustillo underscored the fact that "the term fraud as used in Section 13 of [RA] 3019 is understood in its generic sense."[32] In upholding the suspension of therein petitioner, the Court held that "the allegation of falsification of the three public documents by making it appear that the flood control project was 100% complete [when in fact it was not,] constitutes fraud upon public funds."[33] | |||||
|
2011-02-09 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| A conclusion of law is a determination by a judge or ruling authority regarding the law that applies in a particular case. It is opposed to a finding of fact, which interprets the factual circumstances to which the law is to be applied.[31] A narration of facts is merely an account or description of the particulars of an event or occurrence.[32] We have held that a certification by accused officials in the Statement of Time Elapsed and Work Accomplished qualifies as a narration of facts as contemplated under Article 171 (4) of the Revised Penal Code, as it consisted not only of figures and numbers but also words were used therein giving an account of the status of the flood control project.[33] | |||||