You're currently signed in as:
User

PRUDENTE D. SOLLER v. SANDIGANBAYAN

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

2005-05-17
CALLEJO, SR., J.
This is a petition for review on certiorari of the Decision[1] of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 44261 annulling the decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Naga City, Branch 19, in Civil Case No. RTC'96-3612.
2005-04-26
CALLEJO, SR., J.
The petitioner also posited that although the Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction over offenses committed by public officials and employees in relation to their office, the mere allegation in the Amended Informations that she committed the offenses charged in relation to her office is not sufficient as the phrase is merely a conclusion of law; controlling are the specific factual allegations in the Informations that would indicate the close intimacy between the discharge of her official duties and the commission of the offenses charged.  To bolster her stance, she cited the rulings of this Court in People v. Montejo,[6] Soller v. Sandiganbayan,[7] and Lacson v. Executive Secretary.[8] She further contended that although the Amended Informations alleged that she conspired with her co-accused to commit the crimes charged, they failed to allege and show her exact participation in the conspiracy and how she committed the crimes charged. She also pointed out that the funds subject of the said Amended Informations were not under her control or administration.