GR 92658; (April, 1991) (Digest)
G.R. No. 92658 ; April 30, 1991
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ARMANDO VASQUEZ y PARALES, RICARDO CORDOVA y CONSUELO, RICARDO PAREDES y BINGALA, et al., accused-appellants.
FACTS
Accused-appellants Armando Vasquez, Ricardo Cordova, and Ricardo Paredes were charged with Robbery with Homicide. The prosecution evidence established that on the evening of September 16, 1988, at least eight armed men entered the Malvar residence in Kawit, Cavite. The intruders tied up the sisters Jacqueline and Susan Malvar and their aunt Purificacion Malvar. Appellants were positively identified as among those who ransacked the house and carted away cash and valuables. During the robbery, the victims’ brother, Angelito Malvar, was brought upstairs, struck on the head with a gun, and later shot to death. The prosecution’s case relied heavily on the eyewitness testimonies of the three female victims, who identified the appellants during the police line-up, in their sworn statements, and in open court.
The appellants interposed the defenses of alibi and denial. They claimed they were elsewhere during the incident and disowned their extrajudicial confessions, alleging these were obtained through force and without proper legal assistance. The trial court convicted them of the complex crime of Robbery with Homicide, aggravated by nighttime.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellants based on the evidence presented.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The trial court correctly disregarded the extrajudicial confessions due to constitutional infirmities concerning the right to counsel. However, the conviction was firmly grounded on other sufficient evidence. The positive identification of the appellants by the three eyewitnesses was clear, consistent, and credible. The witnesses had ample opportunity to recognize the appellants as the house was well-lit and the perpetrators did not wear masks. Their identification during the police line-up and in court was unequivocal.
The defenses of alibi and denial must fail when arrayed against positive identification. For alibi to prosper, an accused must demonstrate not only their presence elsewhere but also the physical impossibility of being at the crime scene. The appellants’ alibis were uncorroborated and unconvincing. Furthermore, conspiracy was adequately proven by the appellants’ collective and coordinated actions during the robbery, demonstrating a community of criminal purpose. In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all, rendering the degree of individual participation immaterial. The award of civil indemnity was increased to P50,000.00 in line with prevailing jurisprudence.