GR 102063; (January, 1993) (Digest)
G.R. No. 102063 January 20, 1993
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROLANDO DE LA CRUZ y GOMEZ @ BLUT, accused-appellant.
FACTS
Accused-appellant Rolando de la Cruz y Gomez @ Blut was charged with Robbery with Homicide before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila. The Information alleged that on or about October 1, 1988, in Manila, the accused, conspiring with others, while on board a passenger jeep and pretending to be passengers, by means of force, violence, and intimidation, robbed Abel Requejo of a wristwatch, wallet, cash, and other items. On the occasion of the robbery, and in pursuance of the conspiracy, they stabbed Venancio Estacio y Panelo twice on the chest, causing his death. Upon arraignment, the accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented witnesses including the jeepney driver Sotero Dionisio, his wife Catalina Dionisio, victim Abel Requejo, and Dr. Maximo Reyes. The defense presented the accused and his mother, Rita dela Cruz. The trial court found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to life imprisonment, with indemnity to the heirs of the deceased. The accused appealed.
ISSUE
The sole issue raised is whether the trial court gravely erred in convicting the accused-appellant despite the alleged weakness and lack of concreteness of the prosecution’s evidence on the question of whether or not the accused-appellant is the author of the crime charged.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The issue raised is factual and involves the credibility of witnesses, a matter primarily within the trial court’s competence. The trial court’s findings on credibility are entitled to the highest degree of respect and will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear showing of oversight, misunderstanding, or misapplication of facts of weight and substance. No such showing exists here. The identity of the appellant and his participation in the robbery were established beyond doubt by the clear and convincing testimonies of prosecution witnesses Abel Requejo and Catalina Dionisio, who positively identified him as one of the holduppers. The defense of denial and alibi presented by the appellant, corroborated only by his mother, cannot prevail over the positive identification by credible witnesses. The court found the prosecution’s evidence strong and the defense weak. The penalty imposed and the civil liability awarded were affirmed.