G.R. No. 246942 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. JOSEPHINE ANGSICO, VIRGILIO V. DACALOS, FELICISIMO F. LAZARTE, JR., JOSEPHINE T. ESPINOSA, AND NOEL A. LOBRIDO, ACCUSED; JOSEPHINE CASENAS-HOTTLE (FORMERLY ANGSICO), VIRGILIO V. DACALOS, FELICISIMO F. LAZARTE, JR., AND NOEL A. LOBRIDO, ACCUSED-.

Ruling

Accordingly, it sentenced them to suffer the penalties of imprisonment for an indeterminate period of six (6) years and one (1) month, as minimum, to ten (10) years, as maximum, and perpetual disqualification from public office. [21] The Sandiganbayan found that all the elements of the crime charged are present, considering that: First , accused-appellants were all public officers at the time relevant to this case, occupying various positions in the NHA, and the acts complained of relate to their official duties. Second , they exhibited manifest partiality and evident bad faith when they: (a) violated COA Circular No. 87-267-A when they awarded to Triad a contract for the remaining works in the Pahanocoy Project which exceeded the allowable escalation price by PHP 2,455,615.01 and such payment was made without prior approval of the President; and ( b ) they allowed Triad to proceed to take on the purported "back jobs" of A.C. Cruz without it being included in the contract of Triad, and without the required contract variation order . Third , the foregoing resulted in the payment of NHA to Triad a bloated amount of PHP 1,280,964.20, thereby giving unwarranted benefits to Triad and causing undue prejudice to the government. In this relation, the Sandiganbayan found the presence of conspiracy among accused-appellants in executing the Second Abstract which supposedly justified an increase in payment made to Triad when it was not clearly established that the latter indeed accomplished such additional works or if there was any such additional work to begin with. In light of the foregoing, the Sandiganbayan concluded that accused-appellants' acts in processing the Second Abstract without even verifying its veracity are clearly guilty of the crime charged. [22] Dissatisfied, accused-appellants moved for reconsideration, [23] which was denied in a Resolution [24] dated March 28, 2019; hence, the instant consolidated appeals. [25] The Issue Before the Court The core issue for the Court's resolution is whether accused-appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of violation of Section 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3019. The Court's Ruling The appeal is without merit as regards Angsico, Dacalos, Lobrido, and Espinosa, but meritorious with respect to Lazarte. I. Prefatorily, the Court notes the pronouncement in Villarosa v. People , [26] wherein the Court, through Chief Justice Diosdado M. Peralta, set a policy on resolving appeals involving convictions handed down by the Sandiganbayan, to wit: On July 17, 2013, this Court issued a Resolution which reinstated the instant petition. In the said Resolution, this Court noted that if an accused in a case decided by the SB, which completely disposes of the case, whether in the exercise of its original or appellate jurisdiction, chooses to question such decision of the SB, the legal recourse he/she has is to file a petition for review on certiorari with this Court under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. Howeve