GR 191722; (December, 2013) (Digest)
G.R. No. 191722 ; December 11, 2013
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. GERRY SABANGAN AND NOLI BORN ASAL, Accused. GERRY SABANGAN, Accused-Appellant.
FACTS
On December 27, 1999, Barangay Captain Abe Felonia was shot to death at the Mega Market in Kidapawan City. The prosecution presented eyewitnesses Eden Allado and Flora Navales, who testified that they were inside Navales’s store with Felonia when accused-appellant Gerry Sabangan entered, positioned himself behind the victim, and shot him three times in the head. Allado grappled with Sabangan for the victim’s bag and saw his face at close range. Marlon Cordero testified to seeing Sabangan and co-accused Noli Bornasal fleeing the scene. The police investigation, led by Chief Roberto Badian, led to Sabangan’s arrest after witnesses positively identified him. The Regional Trial Court convicted both Sabangan and Bornasal of Murder.
The Court of Appeals affirmed Sabangan’s conviction but acquitted Bornasal, finding insufficient evidence of conspiracy. Sabangan appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing the eyewitness testimonies were inconsistent and unreliable. He claimed the witnesses were coached, their affidavits were taken long after the incident, and that his defense of alibi—that he was elsewhere at the time—should prevail.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the prosecution proved Sabangan’s guilt for the crime of Murder beyond reasonable doubt, particularly regarding the credibility of the eyewitness identifications and the presence of treachery.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed Sabangan’s conviction. The Court upheld the factual findings of the lower courts, emphasizing that the assessment of witness credibility is best undertaken by the trial court. The alleged inconsistencies in the eyewitness accounts—such as minor details about the sequence of shouts or the exact positioning—were deemed trivial and did not detract from the consistent and positive identification of Sabangan as the gunman. The Court ruled that such minor variances even bolster credibility, as they indicate unrehearsed testimony.
The defense of alibi was rejected as inherently weak and could not prevail over the positive identification by credible witnesses. The Court found the qualifying circumstance of treachery to be present. The attack was sudden and from behind, at close range, ensuring the victim had no opportunity to defend himself. This method of execution directly and specially ensured the crime’s completion without risk to the assailant. The Court modified the awarded damages, increasing civil indemnity and exemplary damages in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence. The decision of the Court of Appeals was affirmed with modifications on the civil liabilities.