G.R. No. 133267; August 8, 2002
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Wilfredo Peralta @ Willie, accused-appellant.
FACTS
An Information was filed accusing Wilfredo Peralta, Severo Espinosa, Jr., and several John Does of the murder of Chief PNP Inspector Arthur Rivera on April 2, 1993, in Sitio Tabane, Brgy. Aguso, Tarlac, Tarlac. Peralta and Espinosa pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented witnesses: Myrna Borromeo (Espinosa’s live-in partner) testified that in March 1993, she heard Peralta say Rivera was scheduled to be killed, and a week after the killing, Peralta told Espinosa to hide their vehicle. Francisco Rivera (the victim’s 13-year-old son) testified he witnessed the shooting, saw a man alight from a stainless owner jeep and shoot his father, and identified Peralta as the gunman firing an armalite from a following passenger jeep. Conrado Capitulo (a bystander) testified he saw a Sarao jeepney stop, and its occupant fire an M-16 armalite at Rivera’s car; he later identified Peralta in a police lineup as the gunman. Myrna Rivera (the victim’s wife) testified on damages. Dr. Saturnino Ferrer testified the cause of death was a gunshot wound. Danilo Castañeda (a self-confessed gun-for-hire) testified about meetings at his house where Peralta, Espinosa, and others planned the killing because Peralta was mad at Rivera for driving them out of Barangay Aguso, and that arms were procured. Carlos Rocha testified about a meeting at his house where the killing was planned. The defense presented alibi witnesses, including Peralta’s wife and sister-in-law, who claimed he was at a birthday party in Pangasinan at the time of the crime. The Regional Trial Court found Peralta guilty of murder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to pay damages.
ISSUE
The main issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of accused-appellant Wilfredo Peralta for the crime of murder beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the testimonies of prosecution witnesses, particularly eyewitnesses Francisco Rivera and Conrado Capitulo, to be credible and consistent. Their positive identification of Peralta as the gunman prevailed over his defense of alibi, which was not physically impossible. The Court found the qualifying circumstance of treachery was present because the attack was sudden and unexpected, rendering the victim unable to defend himself. The Court modified the damages awarded, increasing the indemnity for death to P50,000.00, awarding P184,715.00 as actual damages (based on receipts), P50,000.00 as moral damages, and P50,000.00 as exemplary damages due to the presence of treachery. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed.