G.R. No. 137369. November 15, 2001.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALIAS KOBEN VISTA, VIC PEDRO and RICHARD OMALI, accused. ALIAS KOBEN VISTA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On the evening of February 1, 1994, Ceferino Vista Jr. attacked the Lomugdang family in their home in Tibiao, Antique, shooting and hacking members of the household. During the struggle, an accomplice, Vic Pedro, fired at Demetrio Lomugdang but instead hit and killed Ceferino. The wounded family members, including the seriously injured Kennedy Catague, then embarked on a journey to bring him to a hospital. While walking along a feeder road in the early hours of February 2, 1994, the group was illuminated by their petromax lamp and flashlight. Prosecution witness Nicanor Lomugdang positively identified accused-appellant Alias Koben Vista, along with Vic Pedro and Richard Omali, about twenty meters away. He saw Koben Vista stand from a squatting position and hurl a grenade at them. The explosion killed Francario Lomugdang and Francisco Catague on the spot.
The defense presented denial and alibi. Accused-appellant claimed he was at home sleeping during the incident and only learned of his brother Ceferino’s death the next morning. He argued that the police blotter entry, based on a hasty narration by a witness, did not initially include his name, casting doubt on his identification.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of accused-appellant Alias Koben Vista for multiple murder with the use of an explosive beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of the credibility of the prosecution eyewitness, Nicanor Lomugdang. His positive identification was deemed credible and reliable, as he was familiar with the accused and the scene was sufficiently illuminated by their lamps. The Court ruled that such positive testimony prevails over a defense of denial and alibi. For alibi to prosper, the accused must demonstrate it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene. Here, accused-appellant himself admitted that his residence was only two kilometers from the crime scene, a distance walkable in half an hour, thus not rendering his presence impossible.
The Court further found that the initial omission of his name from the police blotter did not discredit the eyewitness account, as the entry was based on a hurried statement given in the early morning hours immediately after the traumatic event. The trial court correctly appreciated the qualifying circumstance of treachery, as the grenade attack was sudden and unexpected, leaving the victims no opportunity to defend themselves. The decision was affirmed with modification, increasing the civil indemnity to P50,000.00 for each of the two victims.