G.R. No. L-61260 February 17, 1992
SERGIO BAUTISTA, petitioner, vs. HON. JOSE P. CASTRO, In His Capacity as Presiding Judge of Branch IX (Quezon City), COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF RIZAL, and ROBERTO MIGUEL, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Sergio Bautista and private respondent Roberto Miguel were candidates for Barangay Captain of Teachers Village East, Quezon City, in the May 17, 1982 elections. After canvass, Bautista was proclaimed winner by a two-vote plurality. Miguel filed an election protest. The city court’s revision of ballots resulted in a tie. Miguel appealed to the Court of First Instance (CFI), which reversed the city court and proclaimed Miguel the winner by 24 votes. Bautista filed this petition, raising questions on the admissibility of a handwriting report and the appreciation of specific ballots. Although the term for the office had expired, the Supreme Court resolved to decide the case on its merits, as it had been submitted for decision prior to the term’s expiration.

ISSUE

The core issues involve the correctness of the appellate court’s appreciation of contested ballots and its reliance on a handwriting examination report to invalidate certain votes for Bautista.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the CFI decision. On the first issue, the Court held that the CFI erred in relying on the handwriting examination report (PDIL Report) by Desiderio A. Pagui to invalidate 18 ballots for Bautista. Pagui was never presented as a witness, nor was he qualified as an expert. His report, attached only to a memorandum, was hearsay and inadmissible. Without this report, there was no competent evidence to prove the ballots were written by one person. Therefore, these 18 ballots were valid votes for Bautista. On the appreciation of specific ballots, the Court ruled that Exhibit “5” was correctly invalidated by the CFI as a stray vote, as the voter wrote “Bautista” for councilman without indicating an intention to vote for him as captain. However, the Court reversed the CFI on Exhibit “6”. While Bautista’s name was written in the councilman space, it was preceded by “Bo. Barangay,” which the Court interpreted as an abbreviation for “Punong Barangay,” showing a clear voter intent to vote for Bautista as captain. This vote was valid. Exhibit “7” was correctly invalidated for having Bautista’s name written seven times, a clear identifying mark. The final tally resulted in Miguel being declared the duly elected Barangay Captain, but with a reduced plurality of twenty-two (22) votes.