G.R. No. 113018 June 5, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. GABRIEL CIPRIANO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Gabriel Cipriano was charged with murder for the killing of Cresencia Mirasol on February 3, 1990, in Tacloban City. The prosecution presented evidence that at around 10:00 PM, the victim was at her residence with Emma Balo when a gunshot was heard. The victim was hit, uttered “Agi, agi,” and died from a gunshot wound to the chest. Geronimo Mirasol, the victim’s brother, testified about prior altercations with appellant, including incidents where appellant challenged him to a fight with a firearm and fired an armalite rifle in the air. Arnulfo Reyes testified that he heard the gunshot and saw appellant emerge from a gutter near the victim’s house, holding a gun, before riding away on a bicycle. Reyes also testified that on February 11, 1990, appellant shot him, which he believed was because he had knowledge of the killing and had executed a sworn statement implicating appellant. Dr. Angel Cordero confirmed the cause of death and opined the assailant was behind and elevated relative to the victim. Patrolmen Tan and Modesto testified about appellant’s absence from duty and his possession and pledging of a .45 caliber pistol. Ruben Espeleta testified that appellant pledged said pistol to him. The pistol was later recovered via search warrant. Ballistic examination by Vicente de Vera confirmed that the slug from the victim’s body was fired from the pistol pledged by appellant. The defense presented alibi, claiming appellant was at a cockfight derby and later at a celebration at the time of the crime.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant Gabriel Cipriano of murder based on the evidence presented.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The prosecution evidence, particularly the positive identification by eyewitness Arnulfo Reyes, was found credible and sufficient to establish appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court noted that Reyes had no ill motive to testify falsely, knew appellant well, and had a clear view under well-lighted conditions. The alibi defense was rejected as inherently weak and not physically impossible, as the distance between the crime scene and the alibi location was only about one kilometer. The ballistic evidence conclusively linked appellant’s pistol to the crime. The killing was qualified as murder by treachery, as the attack was sudden and from behind, giving the victim no opportunity to defend herself. The aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation was not sufficiently proven. The appealed judgment was affirmed in toto.