G.R. No. 97308 April 7, 1992
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PETER HATAGUE and ORLANDO MIRADOR, accused-appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Peter Hatague and Orlando Mirador were convicted of murder by the Regional Trial Court and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. The information alleged that on October 2, 1989, in Marikina, Metro Manila, they conspired with intent to kill, evident premeditation, and treachery, stabbed Guillermo Abad, causing his death. The prosecution evidence established that the victim, Abad, and his companions went to Jerez Restaurant. After a receptionist, Millet, complained that her drink was sprinkled with “vetsin,” the group paid their bill and left. As Abad exited, appellants chased him. Appellant Mirador repeatedly swung a steel bar, and appellant Hatague, armed with a pointed instrument, stabbed the victim multiple times. Abad managed to get up but was chased and stabbed again by Hatague until he collapsed. The victim died from the wounds. The defense consisted of denial and alibi, claiming that Eric and Benigno Albitos were the assailants. The defense presented Cecilia Abad, the victim’s widow, who executed an affidavit of desistance, which she admitted was executed not because appellants were guiltless but because she had forgiven them.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the trial court erred in giving full weight to the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies and in convicting accused-appellants despite the alleged absence of evidence proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which hinges on the credibility of witnesses.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The trial court’s findings on witness credibility are accorded great weight and respect, and there was no showing it overlooked substantial facts. The defense of denial and alibi is weak and cannot prevail over the positive identification by prosecution witnesses. Appellants were positively identified by witnesses Benigno Albitos and Carlito Mitra as the assailants. Furthermore, Hatague admitted to Albitos that he stabbed the customer. The claim that Eric and Benigno Albitos were responsible was not substantiated by evidence. The affidavit of desistance executed by the widow was unreliable, as she admitted it was based on forgiveness, not innocence. The crime was murder qualified by treachery, as the attack was sudden and unexpected, giving the victim no opportunity to defend himself. The Court modified the civil indemnity, increasing it to P50,000.00 in line with prevailing jurisprudence. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the award for funeral expenses were affirmed.