G.R. No. 170583 - Fullero vs. People

Ernesto M. Fullero, the petitioner, was charged with falsification of public document under paragraph 4, Article 171 of the Revised Penal Code through an Amended Information dated 14 October 1997.
The charge stemmed from petitioner’s alleged falsification of his Civil Service Form 212 (Personal Data Sheet or PDS) submitted to the Bureau of Telecommunication Regional Office No. 5, Legazpi City, indicating that he passed the Civil Engineering Board Examinations on May 30-31, 1985 with a rating of 75.8%.
Upon verification with the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC), petitioner took the examinations in May 1984 and May 1985 but failed with ratings of 56.75% and 56.10%, respectively.
Petitioner pleaded not guilty upon arraignment on 5 January 1998.

Petitioner was employed as a telegraph operator at the Bureau of Telecommunications Office (BTO) in Iriga City from 1977 and became the Acting Chief Operator of the same office from 1982 to 1994.
A PDS dated 8 January 1988, purportedly accomplished and signed by petitioner, indicated he passed the civil engineering board examinations in May 1985 with a rating of 75.8%.
This PDS was submitted to the BTO Regional Office in Legazpi City.
A letter from petitioner dated 7 March 1988 showed his application for a Junior Telecommunications Engineer or Telecommunications Traffic Supervisor position with the Civil Service Commission (CSC) Region 5.

Florenda B. Magistrado, petitioner’s subordinate, upon consulting the PRC, found that petitioner was not a licensed civil engineer, as his name was not in the book of registration of civil engineers.
Petitioner denied executing or submitting the PDS containing the false statement about passing the civil engineering board exam and disowned the signature and thumbmark appearing therein.
He claimed differences in signatures and typographical inconsistencies in the PDS and suggested ill motive by Magistrado due to prior disciplinary actions against her.
He also challenged the RTC’s jurisdiction, arguing the falsification took place in Iriga City, not Legazpi City.

Prosecution witnesses included Magistrado, Joaquin C. Atayza (PRC Regional Director), Romeo Brizo (BTO Records Officer), Emma Francisco (PRC Records Officer), and Edith C. Avenir (CSC Special Investigator).
Magistrado testified about verifying the PDS and discovering the falsehood, and the sequence leading to the filing of charges.
Atayza and Francisco provided official PRC records and certifications showing petitioner took but failed the civil engineering board exams.
Brizo and Magistrado testified to familiarity with petitioner’s genuine signature and affirmed the signature in the PDS belonged to him.
Avenir presented petitioner’s letter of application and certification submitted to CSC, which claimed he was a licensed civil engineer.
Documentary evidence included certifications from PRC, PDS, transcript of stenographic notes, petitioner’s application letter, administrative case orders, and daily time records bearing petitioner’s signature.

Petitioner testified alone, denying execution and submission of the fraudulent PDS and again challenged signatures and the authenticity of documentary evidence.
He argued that the PDS had mixed-case typewriting, which his typewriter did not support, suggesting it could not be his document.
He questioned Magistrado’s credibility due to prior disciplinary disputes.
Petitioner claimed he was not obligated to disclose being a licensed civil engineer or that it was a qualification for his position.
He also disputed the jurisdiction of the Legazpi RTC, stating the crime likely happened in Iriga City.

Whether there was sufficient evidence to prove petitioner actually performed the act of falsification charged.
Whether petitioner had a legal obligation to state the information about passing the board exams in the PDS and if criminal intent was shown.
Whether the RTC erred in admitting documentary evidence not properly identified, and considering such evidence in determining guilt.
Whether the RTC lacked jurisdiction because the falsification allegedly occurred in Iriga City, not Legazpi City.