G.R. No. 135035; November 29, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SEGUNDO ALVERIO, JR., accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Segundo Alverio, Jr., along with Jose Juanites and a John Doe, was charged with Murder for the killing of Santos Cabillan, Jr., on July 22, 1994, in Caibiran, Biliran. The prosecution alleged that the three accused, conspiring and mutually helping one another with abuse of superior strength, attacked and stabbed the victim with a bladed weapon, inflicting multiple mortal wounds. Only Alverio was apprehended and tried. The prosecution presented two eyewitnesses, Bianito Solayao and Victorio Cabalquinto, who testified that while they and the victim were walking home around 1:00 a.m., they were met by three persons. They positively identified Alverio as the one who collared the victim from behind and stabbed him, while his two companions positioned themselves in front and also stabbed the victim. They claimed the area was illuminated by an electric post and bright moonlight. The medico-legal officer confirmed the victim sustained thirty-eight wounds.
The defense interposed alibi and denial. Alverio claimed he was at home caring for his sick child at the time of the incident and was later arrested without a warrant while working on a school fence. His alibi was corroborated by his friend Roberto Diaz and teacher Lilibeth Martinez. The Regional Trial Court convicted Alverio of Murder, sentencing him to Reclusion Perpetua and ordering him to pay damages. On appeal, Alverio challenged the credibility of the eyewitness identification, the circumstances of his arrest, and the appreciation of the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength.

ISSUE

The core issues were: (1) the credibility of the prosecution eyewitnesses’ identification of Alverio; (2) the weight of the defense of alibi and denial against positive identification; and (3) the proper appreciation of the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. On the issue of witness credibility, the Court upheld the trial court’s findings, emphasizing that the assessment of witness testimony is best undertaken by the trial court due to its direct opportunity to observe demeanor and credibility. The Court found the testimonies of Solayao and Cabalquinto to be clear, consistent, and credible. They provided detailed accounts of the attack and positively identified Alverio, noting adequate illumination from a nearby electric post and bright moonlight, which made recognition possible despite the nighttime. The Court ruled that the defense’s claim of a dark crime scene, based on a police officer’s testimony, did not discredit the eyewitnesses’ positive and categorical identification.
Regarding the defense of alibi and denial, the Court reiterated that these are inherently weak defenses, especially when pitted against positive identification by credible witnesses. For alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only his presence elsewhere but also the physical impossibility of being at the crime scene. Alverio failed to establish such impossibility. His denial likewise could not prevail over the straightforward and corroborated eyewitness accounts. The Court also found no merit in the challenge to his warrantless arrest, as any irregularity in the arrest was cured by his voluntary submission to the court’s jurisdiction.
Finally, the Court sustained the trial court’s appreciation of abuse of superior strength as a qualifying circumstance. The Court explained that while superiority in numbers alone is insufficient, it qualifies the crime to murder when the assailants jointly use their superior strength and weapons to overwhelm the victim, rendering him defenseless. Here, three armed assailants suddenly attacked a single, unarmed victim, clearly taking advantage of their combined strength. Thus, the crime was properly qualified as Murder. The penalty