Tadena v. People

 

Tadena v. People

G.R. No. 228610

March 20, 2019

J. Reyes, Jr. - A municipal mayor, who changed the wordings of a municipal ordinance, is guilty of falsification by a public officer of a public document.

FACTS:

                On 17 October 2001, the accused Floro T. Tadena, then the Municipal Mayor of Sto. Domingo, Ilocos Sur, wrote a letter to the members of the Sangguniang Bayan requesting for the creation of the position of a Municipal Administrator. On 10 December 2001, the Sangguniang Bayan adopted the First Version, for the appropriation of the annual budget of the Municipality of Sto. Domingo, Ilocos Sur, for the fiscal year of 2002. Rodel Tagorda, the secretary filed a complaint against the mayor for falsification.

ISSUE:

                Whether or not the Sandiganbayan erred in not dismissing the case.

HELD:

                Article 171 of the RPC, the following are the elements: a. The offender is a public officer, employee, or notary public; b. The offender takes advantage of his/her official position; c. The offender falsifies a document by committing any of the following acts:

1. Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature or rubric;

2. Causing it to appear that persons have participated in any act or proceeding when they did not in fact so participate;

3. Attributing to persons who have participated in an act or proceeding statements other than those in fact made by them;

4. Making untruthful statements in a narration of facts;

5. Altering true dates;

6. Making any alteration or intercalation in a genuine document which changes its meaning;

7. Issuing in an authenticated form a document purporting to be a copy of an original document when no such original exists, or including in such a copy a statement contrary to, or different from, that of the genuine original; or

8. Intercalating any instrument or note relative to the issuance thereof in a protocol, registry, or official book.

The first element, that the offender is a public officer, is indisputably present as the parties stipulated during pre-trial that Tadena was the municipal mayor of Sto. Domingo, Ilocos Sur when the falsification took place The second element is taking advantage of official position in falsifying a document, when (1) the offender has the duty to make, prepare, or intervene in the preparation of a document, or (2) he/she has the official custody of the document which he/she falsifies.  These two aspects are evident in this case. Wherefore, petition is denied and affirmed Resolution of the Sandiganbayan.