Title
Bautista vs. Castro
Case
G.R. No. 61260
Decision Date
Feb 17, 1992
A 1982 barangay election tie between Bautista and Miguel led to a recount, CFI ruling for Miguel, and Supreme Court modification, affirming Miguel's win by 22 votes.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 61260)

Election Protest and Judicial Proceedings

The trial court conducted a revision and recount of ballots, leading to the declaration of a tie where both candidates had received 650 votes each. On July 29, 1982, the Court of First Instance issued a decision reversing the initial proclamation of Bautista, declaring Miguel as the duly elected Barangay Captain with a plurality of twenty-four votes. This ruling was appealed, leading Bautista to file a petition for review by certiorari on August 13, 1982 with several questions of law concerning the validity of numerous contested ballots.

Contestation of Ballots

Bautista’s petition raised critical issues regarding the competence of evidence—specifically questioning the reliance on the opinion of a handwriting expert whose report was never substantiated by the presentation of that expert as a witness. Additionally, Bautista contested the validity of ballots lacking the signature of the poll chairman as well as the proper interpretation of the election laws governing ballot casting and counting.

Examination of Evidence and Trial Court’s Findings

The respondent court acknowledged the findings of handwriting expert Atty. Desiderio A. Pagui regarding certain contested ballots but indicated that their own examination corroborated Pagui’s conclusions in part while also found discrepancies under which some ballots were deemed invalid. The trial court's reliance on visual inspection reinforced the principle that while expert testimony can inform findings, courts are not beholden exclusively to such evidence.

Application of Election Laws

The court analyzed key provisions of election law such as Section 36 of COMELEC Resolution No. 1539 regarding the authentication of ballots. It ruled that ballots without the necessary signatures from election officials could not be counted as valid. The court was firm in its adherence to statutory mandates surrounding the voting process, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the integrity of the electoral system.

Final Rulings on Contested Ballots

In a detailed review, the court validated certain ballots while rejecting others, including those containing identifiable marks that could link the vote back to the individual voter. In some instances, votes were counted based on the intent of t

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.