GR 133381; (November, 2001) (Digest)
G.R. No. 133381 ; November 27, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROMULO @ BOOMING VILLAVER, PAULINO @ JUNJUN VILLAVER (at large), and JEROME GARCES (deceased), ROMULO “BOOMING” VILLAVER, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On the evening of November 26, 1990, in Talisay, Cebu, Albert Guevarra was stabbed to death. Eyewitness Vicente Real, Jr. testified that he saw accused-appellant Romulo “Booming” Villaver and Jerome Garces approach Guevarra from different directions. Villaver first stabbed the victim with a kitchen knife. When Guevarra pulled the knife out, Garces grabbed it and delivered another stab, which proved fatal. Paulino Villaver was also present. Guevarra managed to reach a hospital but succumbed to his injuries. Romulo Villaver was subsequently charged with Murder.
At trial, Villaver interposed the defense of alibi, claiming he was at a store approximately 260 meters away during the incident. His mother testified that he and his brother Paulino looked alike, suggesting a case of mistaken identity, and that darkness from a recent typhoon prevented clear witness identification. The trial court convicted Villaver of Murder, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay civil indemnity.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant Romulo Villaver of Murder based on the eyewitness account, despite his defense of alibi and denial.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The positive, categorical, and consistent identification by eyewitness Vicente Real, Jr., who was familiar with the appellant and had no ill motive to testify falsely, prevails over the weak defense of alibi. For alibi to prosper, the accused must demonstrate it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene. Appellant’s own testimony placed him only 260 meters away, making it not only possible but easy for him to have been present. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is accorded great respect, as it is in the best position to observe demeanor.
The Court found conspiracy, as the acts of Villaver and Garces—simultaneously approaching from different directions and successively stabbing the unarmed and unsuspecting victim—demonstrated a joint purpose and common design. Treachery (alevosia) was correctly appreciated because the sudden and unexpected attack, without provocation, deprived the victim of any chance to defend himself. The crime is therefore Murder. The award of civil indemnity was affirmed. Additionally, moral damages are awarded for the mental anguish suffered by the victim’s heirs, and exemplary damages are warranted due to the presence of treachery. The decision was modified to include P50,000.00 as moral damages and P20,000.00 as exemplary damages.