This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2006-11-27 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| Settled is the rule that the Supreme Court's jurisdiction in a petition for review on certiorari as a mode of appeal under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, as amended, is limited to reviewing only errors of law not of fact.[7] The rationale of this rule is founded on the fact that the Supreme Court is not a trier of facts.[8] However, as exceptions to this rule, the Court may pass upon questions of fact in a petition for review when, among others: (1) the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculation, surmise and conjecture; (2) the inference made is manifestly mistaken; (3) there is grave abuse of discretion; (4) the judgment is based on misapprehension of facts; (5) the findings of fact are premised on the absence of evidence; and (6) the findings of fact are contradicted by evidence on record.[9] The Court finds that the present case does not fall under any of the foregoing exceptions. Thus, on this ground alone, the instant petition should be dismissed. | |||||