G.R. No. 72991 -92 November 26, 1992
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FLORO YADAO, CLARITO INOCELDA @ CARING, HONESTO TATSON and PABLITO PANIS, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On the night of November 25, 1978, in Barangay Maradondon, Cabugao, Ilocos Sur, brothers Jesus and Salustiano Soller were returning home. After separating near a culvert, Salustiano heard gunfire and saw Jesus moaning on the ground, with four men standing over him, two carrying rifles. One of the men turned and shot Salustiano, hitting him in the buttock and forearm. Salustiano identified the assailants as Clarito Inocelda, Floro Yadao, Honesto Tatson, and Pablito Panis. Jesus Soller died from gunshot wounds. The police found the accused the next morning in Barangay Sagayaden. They were charged with murder, frustrated murder, and illegal possession of firearms. During trial, Inocelda was killed and Panis escaped (and was reportedly killed), leaving Yadao and Tatson as the remaining accused. The trial court convicted Yadao and Tatson of murder and frustrated murder but acquitted them of illegal possession of firearms. They were sentenced to Reclusion Perpetua for murder and an indeterminate prison term for frustrated murder. The accused pleaded alibi, claiming they were fishing eight kilometers away at the house of Hipolito Sabugo, a relative of Tatson, at the time of the crime. The prosecution presented Salustiano Soller’s positive identification and the rebuttal testimony of Lolita Soller Aguilar, who saw the four accused in the vicinity earlier that evening.

ISSUE

The main issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellants Floro Yadao and Honesto Tatson based on the testimony of the eyewitness, Salustiano Soller, and in rejecting their defense of alibi.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision. The Court held that the positive identification of the accused by Salustiano Soller prevails over the weak defense of alibi. The alibi was not physically impossible, as the distance of eight kilometers could have been traversed, and the corroboration by Hipolito Sabugo was suspect due to his relationship to Tatson. The Court found conspiracy among the four original accused, as their concerted actions in ambushing the victims demonstrated a common criminal purpose. The crimes were qualified by treachery (alevosia), as the victims were taken by surprise with no chance to defend themselves. The Court deferred to the trial judge’s factual findings and assessment of witness credibility, noting that minor inconsistencies in Salustiano’s testimony did not impair its overall veracity. The penalties imposed by the trial court were sustained.