G.R. No. 118707 February 2, 1998
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Fernando Viovicente y Gondesa, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Fernando Viovicente y Gondesa, together with John Doe, Peter Doe, and Mike Doe, was charged with Murder for the killing of Fernando Hoyohoy y Ventura on July 21, 1991, in Quezon City. The information alleged that the accused, armed with a bolo and an icepick, conspired and attacked the victim, stabbing him on the chest. Prosecution witness Fernando Flores testified that at around 6 a.m., while on his way to work, he saw the victim buying cigarettes. He witnessed four men attack Hoyohoy: accused-appellant Fernando Viovicente and one “Balweg” emerged from behind the store and held the victim by the shoulders, while two others, identified as Maning and Duras, stabbed the victim in the chest with a bolo and an icepick, respectively. Flores was ten steps away and knew accused-appellant from previous work. The victim’s brother, Tomas Hoyohoy, testified that the dying victim identified his assailants as Maning Viovicente, Duras Viovicente, accused-appellant Fernando “Macoy” Viovicente, and Romero “Balweg” Obando. The victim died later that day. A police investigator, Cpl. Iluminado Combalicer, testified that he took a statement from the victim at the hospital where the victim identified “Maning” and “Duras” as his assailants but did not mention accused-appellant or “Balweg.” The defense was alibi, with accused-appellant claiming he was in Bataan on the day of the incident and was arrested two weeks later at his cousins’ house. The Regional Trial Court convicted accused-appellant of murder. The Court of Appeals affirmed the guilt but found the penalty should be reclusion perpetua and certified the case to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

The main issues were: (1) whether the trial court erred in giving weight to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses and disregarding the defense of alibi; and (2) whether the trial court erred in finding accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt despite the victim’s ante-mortem statement to the police investigator which did not identify accused-appellant as an assailant.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction with modifications. The Court held that the dying declaration of the victim to his brother Tomas was admissible under Rule 130, §37 of the Rules on Evidence, as it concerned the crime and circumstances of his death, was made under consciousness of impending death, the declarant was competent, and it was offered in a murder case where he was the victim. The Court ruled that a dying declaration need not be in writing. The delay in reporting the declaration to the police was satisfactorily explained. The Court found the testimony of eyewitness Fernando Flores credible, detailed, and consistent, and no ill motive was shown to impel him to testify falsely. The defense of alibi was weak and uncorroborated, and the positive identification by the eyewitness prevailed. The Court agreed with the Court of Appeals that the proper penalty was reclusion perpetua due to the absence of mitigating or aggravating circumstances. The award of damages was modified: accused-appellant was ordered to pay the heirs P9,000.00 as actual damages (burial expenses), P50,000.00 as moral damages, and P50,000.00 as civil indemnity for the death of the victim.