G.R. No. 101584. April 7, 1993.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. LUCIANO JUMAMOY Y AÑORA, alias “JUNIOR”, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Two separate informations for Murder and Qualified Illegal Possession of Firearm and Ammunitions were filed against accused Luciano Jumamoy. The Murder charge alleged that on April 1, 1987, in Inabanga, Bohol, the accused, with intent to kill, evident premeditation, and treachery, shot Rolando Miel with an unlicensed firearm, causing his instantaneous death. The accused pleaded not guilty to both charges, and the cases were consolidated for trial.
The prosecution evidence established that the accused and the victim were once friends until the victim stabbed the accused in 1970, resulting in a deformed left arm for the accused. On the evening of April 1, 1987, the victim and companions attended a disco at the Cultural Center. While the victim was leaning against a concrete post conversing with friends, the accused suddenly appeared and shot him. The victim was hit and died instantly. Prosecution witnesses positively identified the accused as the assailant. The defense presented alibi, claiming the accused was elsewhere at the time. The trial court found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of both crimes and imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment for each, plus indemnity to the victim’s heirs.

ISSUE

The primary issues involve the credibility of prosecution witnesses, the propriety of the conviction despite the non-presentation of some witnesses and the weapon, the validity of the defense of alibi, the presence of treachery, the permissibility of separate prosecutions for Murder and Qualified Illegal Possession, and the correctness of the penalties and damages imposed.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction with modifications. The trial court’s findings on credibility are entitled to great respect, and the prosecution witnesses’ positive identification of the accused, absent any ill motive, is credible. The prosecution’s failure to present all listed witnesses is not suppression of evidence, as it is the prosecutor’s prerogative to determine which witnesses to present. Minor inconsistencies in testimonies do not impair credibility. The production of the weapon is not a condition sine qua non for conviction. The defense of alibi cannot prevail over positive identification. The killing was attended by treachery, as the attack was sudden and unexpected, leaving the unarmed victim no opportunity to defend himself. Separate prosecutions for Murder (Revised Penal Code) and Qualified Illegal Possession of Firearm (special law) do not constitute double jeopardy. The penalty for Murder is reclusion perpetua, which is not the same as life imprisonment; thus, the words “or life imprisonment” must be deleted from the dispositive portion. The civil indemnity for death is increased to P50,000.00. The decision of the trial court is AFFIRMED with the modifications increasing the indemnity to P50,000.00 and deleting “or life imprisonment.”