WELL-SETTLED IS THE RULE THAT FACTUAL FINDINGS OF THE SANDIGANBAYAN ARE CONCLUSIVE UPON THE SUPREME COURT SAVE IN THE FOLLOWING CASES:

     1) the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculation, surmise and conjecture; 2) the inference made is manifestly an error or founded on a mistake; 3) there is grave abuse of discretion; 4) the judgment is based on misapprehension of facts; 5) the findings of fact are premised on a want of evidence and are contradicted by evidence on record; and 6) said findings of fact are conclusions without citation of specific evidence on which they are based. Between the Sandiganbayan and the Supreme Court, the former was concededly in a better position to determine whether or not a witness was telling the truth.

https://www.facebook.com/mvplawoffice?ref=hl