G.R. No. 123074 July 4, 1997
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FERNANDO FERNANDEZ y MAGNO, ALIAS “FERNAN” and JOEL SANTIAGO y RUSTIA, accused. FERNANDO FERNANDEZ y MAGNO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

An Information was filed charging Fernando Fernandez and Joel Santiago with robbery with homicide and physical injuries. The charge stemmed from an incident on April 10, 1991, in Baliuag, Bulacan, where armed with a chisel and screwdriver, the accused allegedly conspired to rob the residence of Dr. Delfin Tolentino and his wife Eugenia Lindain-Tolentino, taking cash, jewelry, and a Betamax machine. On the occasion of the robbery, Eugenia was stabbed and killed, and Dr. Tolentino sustained physical injuries. Joel Santiago was initially apprehended, tried, and convicted. Accused-appellant Fernando Fernandez remained at-large until his arrest on January 28, 1993. After pleading not guilty, he was tried and convicted by the Regional Trial Court of Malolos, Bulacan, which sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and ordered him to pay civil indemnity and damages. Fernandez appealed, arguing the trial court erred in finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
The evidence for the prosecution established that on April 10, 1991, around 2:00 p.m., a man pretending to need medical treatment rang the doorbell at the Tolentino residence. Dr. Delfin Tolentino let him in. The man, later identified by Dr. Tolentino as accused-appellant Fernando Fernandez, overpowered the doctor, covered his eyes with masking tape, gagged him, tied him up, and took his watch. A second person (Joel Santiago) entered. Dr. Tolentino heard his wife say “Joel, ano ba?” before she fell silent. The two men then took Dr. Tolentino upstairs, removed the tape from his eyes, and forced him to open a vault, which they ransacked, taking jewelry, cash, and documents. Dr. Tolentino testified he was about two feet away and could see both men clearly. After the intruders left, Dr. Tolentino found his wife dead. Dr. Nilo Tolentino (the son) confirmed the scene and the expenses for the wake and burial. PO3 Eladio San Pedro testified that Santiago admitted his participation and implicated Fernandez as the one who stabbed Eugenia. A tricycle owner, Rene Julian, testified that Fernandez, who drove his tricycle, had taken it on the morning of April 10 and was seen parked near the crime scene that afternoon. Dr. Benito Caballero’s autopsy revealed Eugenia sustained 24 stab wounds possibly inflicted by two persons. The defense presented an alibi: Fernandez claimed he had a quarrel with his wife, gave the tricycle to his brother to drive, and took a bus to Isabela on the morning of April 10, thus being away during the crime. His wife and mother corroborated the quarrel and his trip.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in finding accused-appellant Fernando Fernandez guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged.

RULING

The appeal is unmeritorious. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the crime from robbery with homicide and physical injuries to simple robbery with homicide, as the physical injuries are absorbed in the latter crime.
The Court held that the trial court correctly relied on the positive identification by Dr. Delfin Tolentino, who was an eyewitness. Dr. Tolentino clearly and consistently identified Fernandez as one of the perpetrators, providing detailed testimony about seeing him at close range (3-4 feet initially and 1-2 feet during the ransacking) and under sufficient lighting. His advanced age did not impair his credibility, as his testimony demonstrated he possessed the proper mental and physical faculties during the incident. The Court gives great weight to the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility.
The Court agreed with the appellant that the trial court erred in considering PO3 San Pedro’s testimony regarding the implicatory statements of co-accused Joel Santiago. Since Santiago was not presented as a witness, Fernandez was deprived of his right to cross-examine him, rendering those statements inadmissible hearsay. However, this error was not fatal to the prosecution’s case. The positive identification by Dr. Tolentino, who was untainted by improper motive, was sufficient to establish Fernandez’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The law does not require corroboration of positive identification for a conviction.
The defense of alibi was rejected. It cannot prevail over the positive identification of the accused by a credible witness. Furthermore, the testimony of Rene Julian placed Fernandez’s tricycle at the crime scene around the time of the incident.
Finally, the Court modified the crime. The trial court convicted Fernandez of “robbery with homicide and physical injuries.” The correct designation is “robbery with homicide” under Article 294(1) of the Revised Penal Code, as the physical injuries inflicted on Dr. Tolentino on the same occasion are absorbed by the composite crime. Therefore, the appealed judgment was AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that accused-appellant is found guilty of the crime of robbery with homicide.