Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 92 views

    Panes vs. People

    Uploaded by

    Lloyd David P. Vicedo
    The Sandiganbayan found Panes guilty of taking advantage of his public position by making false statements in a public document to issue a permit allowing illegal betting activities. Panes appealed to the Supreme Court but failed to show that the case fell under any of the recognized exceptions for appeals from the Sandiganbayan, which can only consider questions of law. As Panes did not raise any new issues or show that the Sandiganbayan misapprehended the facts or ruled contrary to law, the Supreme Court upheld the Sandiganbayan's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Panes vs. People

    Uploaded by

    Lloyd David P. Vicedo
    92 views1 page
    The Sandiganbayan found Panes guilty of taking advantage of his public position by making false statements in a public document to issue a permit allowing illegal betting activities. Panes appealed to the Supreme Court but failed to show that the case fell under any of the recognized exceptions for appeals from the Sandiganbayan, which can only consider questions of law. As Panes did not raise any new issues or show that the Sandiganbayan misapprehended the facts or ruled contrary to law, the Supreme Court upheld the Sandiganbayan's decision.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Sandiganbayan found Panes guilty of taking advantage of his public position by making false statements in a public document to issue a permit allowing illegal betting activities. Panes appealed to the Supreme Court but failed to show that the case fell under any of the recognized exceptions for appeals from the Sandiganbayan, which can only consider questions of law. As Panes did not raise any new issues or show that the Sandiganbayan misapprehended the facts or ruled contrary to law, the Supreme Court upheld the Sandiganbayan's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    92 views1 page

    Panes vs. People

    Uploaded by

    Lloyd David P. Vicedo
    The Sandiganbayan found Panes guilty of taking advantage of his public position by making false statements in a public document to issue a permit allowing illegal betting activities. Panes appealed to the Supreme Court but failed to show that the case fell under any of the recognized exceptions for appeals from the Sandiganbayan, which can only consider questions of law. As Panes did not raise any new issues or show that the Sandiganbayan misapprehended the facts or ruled contrary to law, the Supreme Court upheld the Sandiganbayan's decision.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    G.R. No. 234561.

    November 11, 2021


    RAMSY D. PANES,* PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
    RESPONDENT.
    LOPEZ, J., J.
    PROBLEM:
    In 2010, one Corona applied for a business permit to operate a jai-alai betting station
    and was later issued the same, as recommended and approved by Panes and one
    Palanca. Later, several persons were arrested in connection with their illegal betting
    activities for jai-alai. This prompted Panes to cancel the permit because of “failure to
    install a betting machine”.
    A complaint was filed against Panes and Palanca before the OMB-Visayas for taking
    advantage of their public position by making false narration of facts in the public
    document for the issuance of a permit so that Corona can engage in collecting bets for
    jai-alai. The Sandiganbayan found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Whether the
    petition for review on certiorari is proper.
    ANSWER:
    No. Panes failed to allege that his case falls under the recognized exceptions to
    reversed the judgment of the Sandiganbayan.
    Appeals from the Sandiganbayan, only questions of law and not questions of fact may
    be raised. However, all issues brought to this Court on (1) whether the prosecution was
    able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, (2) whether the
    presumption of innocence was sufficiently debunked, (3) whether or not conspiracy was
    satisfactorily established, or (4) whether or not good faith was properly appreciate are
    all, invariably, questions of fact.
    Findings of fact of the Sandiganbayan are binding and conclusive in the absence of a
    showing that they come under the established exceptions, such as: (1) when the
    conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculation, surmises and conjectures; (2)
    the inference made is manifestly mistaken; (3) there is a grave abuse of discretion; 4)
    the judgment is based on misapprehension of facts; (5) said findings of facts are
    conclusions without citation of specific evidence on which they are based; and (6) the
    findings of fact of the Sandiganbayan are premised on the absence of evidence on
    record.
    Panes has not raised any new or novel issue to impel a possible modification much less
    reversal or setting aside of the assailed rulings of the Sandiganbayan. Further, there
    being no showing that the Sandiganbayan committed any misapprehension of facts or
    rendered judgment contrary to law, its findings and conclusions are entitled to great
    respect and will not be overturned by the Court.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy