G.R. No. L-28664, December 22, 1971
People of the Philippines vs. Roberto Yap alias “Kiat” and Roque Villagracia y Fanoy alias “Kokeng”; Roberto Yap, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

The accused, Roberto Yap and an at-large co-accused, were charged with robbery with homicide. The prosecution evidence established that on January 28, 1966, in Dapitan City, two men, including Yap, approached the house of Santos Boca. They initially posed as provincial guards searching for escaped prisoners. After being told that the household did not know the fugitives, they waited for Santos Boca to return from the market. Upon his arrival, a conversation ensued. As Santos turned to ascend his house stairs, the two men drew pistols, announced themselves as authorities, and then shot him. Witnesses, including the victim’s nephew and wife, testified that they saw Yap then approach the fallen victim, search his pockets, and take paper bills. The witnesses had also seen Yap at their house the previous evening under a similar pretext. The victim died from multiple gunshot wounds.
The defense presented an alibi. Yap, a provincial guard, claimed he was on official duty in Naga, Zamboanga del Norte, on the day of the crime, having escorted prisoners to court in the morning and being in the municipal building until 4:00 PM. The defense presented a jail warden’s logbook and testimony to support his presence in Naga. The trial court convicted Yap of robbery with homicide, sentencing him to life imprisonment and ordering indemnity. Yap appealed, challenging the credibility of the eyewitnesses and the rejection of his alibi.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved Yap’s guilt for the crime of robbery with homicide beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in light of his alibi defense.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of the eyewitness testimonies as clear, positive, and credible. The witnesses had ample opportunity to observe and identify Yap, as they saw him at close range on two consecutive days under non-threatening circumstances before the shooting. Their identification was deemed reliable. The Court applied the settled doctrine that alibi is inherently weak and cannot prevail over positive identification. It meticulously dismantled the alibi by noting that the evidence only accounted for Yap’s presence in Naga until 10:00 AM on the day of the crime. The crime occurred in Dapitan City around 5:30 PM. The Court took judicial notice that the distance between Naga and Dapitan could be traversed in a few hours by vehicle, and Oro, the specific barangay, was merely three kilometers from Dapitan’s town proper. Thus, Yap had more than sufficient time to travel from Naga to the crime scene. His failure to account for his whereabouts for a six-hour window rendered his alibi untenable. The Court modified the civil liability by increasing the indemnity for death to P12,000.00, in line with prevailing jurisprudence. The penalty of life imprisonment was affirmed.