GR 46497; (September, 1939) (Digest)
G.R. No. 46497; September 18, 1939
ANTONIO S. SAN AGUSTIN, petitioner, vs. CONRADO BARRIOS, Judge of First Instance of Iloilo, EULOGIO GARGANERA, SERAPION C. TORRE, EVELIO ZALDIVAR, FORTUNATO R. YBIERNAS, SERAFIN DE LA CRUZ, LEOPOLDO GANZON, and CRISPINO MELOCOTON, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Antonio S. San Agustin was a candidate for councilor of Iloilo City in the December 14, 1937 election. After losing, he filed an election protest. The trial court initially confirmed the election of the respondents. On appeal, the Supreme Court, in G.R. No. 46196, reversed and ordered the trial judge to reopen the protest, specifically to examine 38 stubless ballots from precinct No. 32, segregate the excess ballots, and determine if the rejection of certain ballots as marked was erroneous. Upon reopening, the trial judge issued a new decision, again declaring the respondents as the duly elected councilors, finding that respondent Crispino Melocoton still led San Agustin by 15 votes. San Agustin then filed this petition for certiorari, alleging the trial judge failed to properly comply with the Supreme Court’s directive by not correctly segregating excess ballots and not ruling on the validity of the rejected marked ballots.
ISSUE
Whether the respondent judge committed a grave abuse of discretion or failed to comply with the Supreme Court’s decision in G.R. No. 46196 by not properly segregating the excess ballots and not determining the validity of the ballots rejected as marked.
RULING
No. The petition is dismissed. The Supreme Court held that the respondent judge sufficiently complied with its previous directive. The decision showed the judge examined the 38 ballots, identified nine as excess ballots (Exhibits Y, MM, 40, 41, 42, 46, 37, 38, 39) and concluded the remaining 29 were properly rejected by the board of inspectors as marked or countersigned. The Court reiterated that while it can compel a judge to decide a question, it cannot dictate how to decide it. Furthermore, the petitioner was estopped from challenging the method of segregation since he had opposed the respondent Melocoton’s proposal for a lottery system and insisted that the court itself should appraise the ballots. Even assuming the nine ballots were valid, San Agustin would only gain two votes, still leaving him 13 votes behind Melocoton. Thus, the petition lacked merit.
AI Generated by Armztrong.