G.R. No. 139185 , September 29, 2003
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Alfonso Rivera @ “Ponso” and Teddy Rivera (at large), Accused-Appellants.

FACTS

On the evening of October 19, 1997, in Barangay Dumga, Makato, Aklan, Jonnifer Losaria was fatally shot while seated on his parked tricycle. The prosecution’s lone eyewitness, Renato Losaria, the victim’s brother, testified that he saw accused-appellant Alfonso Rivera driving a motorcycle with his brother Teddy as a back rider. The motorcycle slowed down near the victim, and Teddy Rivera, from a distance of three feet, shot Jonnifer once in the left temple. Renato, who was about ten meters away under street light illumination, recognized the assailants as they were his friends. The police investigation, led by SPO2 Ferdinand Relayson, later led to Alfonso Rivera after witness Juanito Baylon identified him as the person inquiring about the victim’s residence earlier that day.
The defense presented an alibi, claiming Alfonso was at a different barangay attending a birthday party at the time of the shooting, supported by the testimonies of the party host and a guest. The trial court rejected the alibi, giving credence to the positive identification by Renato Losaria, and convicted Alfonso Rivera of Murder qualified by treachery. The court found that the victim, unaware and seated on his tricycle, was suddenly and deliberately shot, ensuring the execution of the crime without risk to the assailants.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of accused-appellant Alfonso Rivera beyond reasonable doubt, particularly challenging the credibility of the eyewitness identification and the sufficiency of evidence to establish conspiracy and the qualifying circumstance of treachery.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of Renato Losaria’s credibility, noting that his testimony was clear, consistent, and given under conditions conducive to reliable identification—adequate lighting, proximity to the event, and familiarity with the accused. The defense’s attack on the credibility, based on minor inconsistencies and the witness’s initial hesitation to name the assailants to the police, was deemed insufficient to impair his overall trustworthiness. The alibi defense was correctly rejected for being weak and unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence, especially in light of positive identification.
On the qualifying circumstance, the Court agreed that treachery was present. The attack was sudden and deliberate, executed in a manner that denied the victim any opportunity to defend himself or retaliate, thereby ensuring its execution without risk to the assailants. However, the Court modified the ruling on conspiracy. The evidence only established that Alfonso Rivera drove the motorcycle, facilitating the attack, but did not conclusively prove a community of criminal design with the shooter. Thus, while Alfonso was liable as a principal by indispensable cooperation under Article 17 of the Revised Penal Code, the qualifying circumstance of treachery was not attributable to him in the absence of proven conspiracy. His liability was for Homicide, not Murder. The case was remanded for the proper determination of penalties and damages.