G.R. No. 130657 . April 1, 2002.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ERICTO APPEGU Y MATERUM, ANSELMO GAMUEDA Y ALCANTARA, and ROMEO GAMUEDA Y ALCANTARA, accused-appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants Ericto Appegu and brothers Anselmo and Romeo Gamueda were charged with the murder of Rose Binua on October 4, 1993, in Abulug, Cagayan. The prosecution’s case rested primarily on the eyewitness account of Alex Bunnao, a nine-year-old boy. Bunnao testified that while walking with a companion in a forested area, he witnessed the attack. He saw Appegu hack the victim with a bolo, Romeo Gamueda bludgeon her with a bamboo club, and Anselmo Gamueda hold her right hand. The assailants then covered the body with talahib grass. Bunnao did not report the incident immediately out of fear. The victim’s body was discovered the next day, bearing multiple hack and blunt force wounds.
The defense interposed alibi and denial. Accused-appellants claimed they were at the house of Barangay Captain Wilfredo Cortez in a different barangay, helping harvest palay on the date of the crime. They asserted they only returned to Sitio Bannag, the crime scene, days later. Barangay Captain Cortez corroborated their alibi. The trial court convicted all three accused of murder and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellants of murder based on the credibility of the lone child eyewitness and in rejecting their defense of alibi.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of Alex Bunnao’s credibility, noting that inconsistencies in his testimony regarding minor details, such as the reason for being at the scene, did not detract from the core consistency of his account of the violent attack. The Court emphasized that the trial judge is in the best position to evaluate witness credibility, and no compelling reason existed to overturn such findings. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected as it was not physically impossible for the accused to be at the crime scene, given the proximity of the barangays involved. The positive identification by a credible witness prevails over a weak alibi.
Furthermore, the Court affirmed the qualifying circumstance of treachery. The attack was sudden and employed means that deprived the victim of any opportunity to defend herself, especially as she was restrained by one assailant while being attacked by two others armed with deadly weapons. The Court also found conspiracy, inferred from the concerted actions of the three accused in carrying out the assault. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was sustained. The award of damages was modified, ordering the accused-appellants to pay solidarily P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages to the victim’s heirs.