G.R. No. 124319 May 13, 1998
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Gari Bibat y Descargar, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

An Information was filed on July 23, 1993, charging accused Gari Bibat y Descargar with Murder for the killing of Lloyd del Rosario y Cabrera on or about October 14, 1992, in Manila. The accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented witnesses Nona Avila Cinco, PO3 Julian Bustamante, Florencio Castro, and Rogelio Robles. Nona Cinco testified that on October 14, 1992, at around 11:30 a.m., she saw the accused at Funeraria Gloria where she overheard a person instruct the accused to ensure someone was killed, to which the accused assented. Later, at around 1:30 p.m., she saw the accused hurry towards the victim, take a pointed object from a notebook, and stab the victim twice in the left chest. After the victim shouted for help, the accused returned and stabbed him again in the chest. She reported the incident on July 20, 1993, out of fear. Florencio Castro testified he saw the accused with four others at the funeral home, where one opened a notebook containing a stainless knife and made a phone call asking “kung nasaan.” Rogelio Robles initially testified that the accused’s group planned revenge against the victim, Lloyd del Rosario, and that he saw the killing; he later recanted, stating he only assisted the victim’s parents and based his testimony on a handwritten statement given to him. The defense presented the accused, who claimed he was at home reviewing for his final oral exams on October 14, 1992, attended his mother’s birthday, went to school with a friend at noon, and took exams from 2:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m., providing an alibi. Witnesses Marte Soriano and Lino Asuncion III corroborated his alibi. The Regional Trial Court found the accused guilty of Murder, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, ordering him to indemnify the heirs with P49,786.14 as actual damages and P50,000.00 as moral damages. The accused appealed.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in giving full faith and credence to the testimonies of the alleged eyewitnesses Nona Avila Cinco and Rogelio Robles.
2. Whether the trial court erred in failing to consider the version of the accused-appellant that he was not at the scene of the crime when it happened.
3. Whether the trial court erred in appreciating the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision.
1. On the credibility of witnesses, the Court upheld the trial court’s findings, emphasizing that the trial judge is in the best position to assess witness credibility, having observed their demeanor. The Court found no arbitrariness in the trial court’s acceptance of Nona Cinco’s testimony, noting that delays in reporting due to fear do not impair credibility. The recantation of Rogelio Robles was deemed unreliable, as recantations are viewed with suspicion and do not necessarily invalidate original testimony.
2. On the accused’s alibi, the Court ruled it was weak and could not prevail over the positive identification by eyewitness Nona Cinco. For alibi to succeed, the accused must prove not only that he was elsewhere when the crime occurred but that it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene. The accused failed to establish this impossibility.
3. On evident premeditation, the Court found it sufficiently proven. The prosecution evidence showed that at 11:30 a.m., Nona Cinco overheard the plan to kill, and by 1:30 p.m., the accused carried out the killing. This two-hour interval provided sufficient time for reflection, satisfying the elements of evident premeditation: the time when the accused determined to commit the crime, an act manifestly indicating his clinging to that determination, and a sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution to allow for reflection. The decision of the trial court was affirmed in all respects.