G.R. No. 138661, November 19, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JERSON ACOJEDO Y EMIA, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On May 4, 1993, at a dance in Guihulngan, Negros Oriental, Joel Garde was stabbed twice in the back while urinating, causing his death. His wife, Mary Garde, witnessed the incident and positively identified the assailant as Jerson Acojedo, a known resident of an adjoining barangay. She testified that Acojedo had followed her husband and that there was a prior altercation between them over money in April 1993. The prosecution presented medico-legal evidence confirming the fatal nature of the wounds.
The defense presented alibi, with Acojedo claiming he was asleep at home, corroborated by his mother. They also presented an affidavit of desistance executed by Mary Garde, stating she was uncertain of the assailant’s identity. However, when presented as a hostile witness, Mary Garde testified she did not understand the English affidavit and was forced to sign it by the accused’s mother.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused of murder based on the prosecution’s evidence and in rejecting the defense of alibi and the affidavit of desistance.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for murder but modified the damages. The trial court’s factual findings, which credited the straightforward and positive identification by the eyewitness, are generally binding on appeal. The affidavit of desistance was properly disregarded. Mary Garde’s testimony as a hostile witness revealed she was illiterate in English, did not understand the affidavit’s contents, and was coerced into signing it. An affidavit of desistance is inherently suspect and does not automatically negate a prior positive identification.
The qualifying circumstance of treachery was correctly appreciated. The attack was sudden, from behind, while the victim was in a vulnerable position urinating, ensuring the execution of the crime without risk to the assailant. However, the Court found evident premeditation not proven, as the prosecution failed to establish the required elements of a prior plan, overt act, and sufficient lapse of time for reflection.
The penalty of reclusion perpetua and civil indemnity of P50,000 were affirmed. The Court additionally awarded moral damages of P50,000 to the victim’s heirs, which is mandatory in murder cases without need of further proof. The defense of alibi, uncorroborated by clear and convincing evidence of physical impossibility, cannot prevail over positive identification.
