G.R. No. 130667 February 22, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ILDEFONSO VIRTUCIO JR. alias “Gaga,” accused-appellant.

FACTS

An Information charged Ildefonso Virtucio Jr. with the murder of Alejandro Briones. The prosecution evidence established that on the evening of March 31, 1996, the accused suddenly approached the victim, who was standing outside his store in Cebu City. Virtucio, muttering about a grudge related to a shabu raid, drew a gun. After an initial misfire aimed at Briones’s head, a struggle ensued. Virtucio then shot Briones in the stomach and forearm. As the wounded victim tried to flee, Virtucio delivered a fatal shot to his head. The incident was witnessed at close range by the victim’s wife, Betty Briones, and their 12-year-old son. Alejandro Briones died two days later from complications of the gunshot wounds.
For his defense, Virtucio interposed alibi, claiming he was in Tabuelan, Cebu, from the morning of March 31 to await the arrival of seashells, and thus could not have been at the crime scene. This was corroborated by his business partner, Pablo Cuer, and Fe Tesoro, the mother of his common-law wife. The Regional Trial Court convicted Virtucio of murder, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, and ordered him to pay indemnity, rejecting his alibi due to his positive identification by eyewitnesses and the failure to prove physical impossibility of his presence at the crime scene.

ISSUE

Whether the conviction of the accused-appellant for the crime of murder is proper.

RULING

Yes, the conviction is proper. The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision, upholding the credibility of the prosecution witnesses. The Court emphasized that the evaluation of witness credibility is best left to the trial court, which directly observed their demeanor. The relationship of the witnesses to the victim does not impair their credibility, and their testimonies were found to be clear and consistent. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected as it was not physically impossible for the accused to have been at the locus criminis, and it is inherently weak against positive identification.
The Court agreed that the killing was attended by treachery. The attack was sudden and unexpected, executed at close range with a gun, rendering the unarmed and unsuspecting victim defenseless and unable to retaliate. This qualified the homicide to murder. However, the Court found that evident premeditation was not sufficiently established, as the prosecution failed to prove the elements of time for reflection and persistence in the criminal intent.
Regarding damages, the Court modified the award. It affirmed the P50,000.00 civil indemnity but reduced the actual damages to P9,000.00, as only this amount was substantiated by competent evidence, contrary to the initial claim of P57,000.00. The decision was thus affirmed with modification to the damages awarded.