G.R. No. 123300 September 25, 1998
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Elpidio Delmendo y Urpiano, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On June 2, 1993, Atty. Elpidio Monteclaro was shot and killed in the courtyard of the courthouse in Cauayan, Isabela, while on his way to attend a court hearing. An information for murder was filed against accused-appellant Elpidio Delmendo. A warrant was issued but returned unserved; the case was archived until May 1995 when appellant was discovered detained in Parañaque under a different name. He was arraigned and pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented eyewitnesses Menrado Laguitan and Lourdes Yanuaria. Laguitan testified he greeted Atty. Monteclaro when appellant suddenly emerged and shot the victim at close range. Yanuaria, viewing from a courtroom window, corroborated the account. Both witnesses described the assailant to police, leading to a sketch. They later identified appellant from a video and pictures from a barangay fiesta, and the Barangay Captain identified the person as Elpidio Delmendo. The defense presented four witnesses who claimed a different person was the gunman, not appellant. The trial court found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in giving weight to the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies and in finding accused-appellant Elpidio Delmendo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder, specifically regarding the positive identification of appellant as the perpetrator.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision. The identification of appellant by prosecution witnesses Laguitan and Yanuaria was positive and unmistakable. The incident occurred in broad daylight, with witnesses in vantage points (4.5 and 3.74 meters away) with unobstructed views, enabling a clear description that led to a sketch and subsequent identification. The witnesses had no ill motive to testify falsely against appellant, whom they did not know prior to the incident. The Court accords highest respect to the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility. Appellant’s defense of denial is weak against positive identification. The defense witnesses’ testimonies were unworthy of belief as they did not report to police, lacked opportunity to see the gunman’s face, and their declarations were found unnatural or biased. Appellant’s failure to testify, while not held against him, allowed an inference that he did not wish to betray himself. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed. The Court modified the damages awarded: indemnity for death increased to P50,000.00; loss of earning capacity recalculated using the formula 2/3 x (80 – age at death) x net annual income, resulting in P2,125,000.00; moral damages of P50,000.00 granted; and funeral expenses of P86,000.00 awarded.