G.R. No. 138989, September 17, 2002
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Erlindo Bensig, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On May 30, 1996, at about 2:00 a.m., during a fiesta in Barangay Don Potenciano Larrazabal, Ormoc City, the victim Leonides Villegas, accompanied by his wife Jenny and nephew Vic, stepped out of a dancing area to buy cigarettes at a store inside a waiting shed. Upon receiving his cigarettes and change, Leonides was suddenly stabbed in the left chest by accused-appellant Erlindo Bensig, who came from behind and then faced him. The victim was brought to the hospital but died upon arrival. The appellant was charged with murder. At trial, prosecution witnesses Jenny and Vic Villegas positively identified the appellant as the perpetrator, testifying they were beside the victim and the area was illuminated by an electric bulb. The defense, anchored on denial, presented appellant and witnesses Porceso Lodong and Jose Boya, who claimed it was a certain Pepe Boya who committed the crime. The trial court found the prosecution witnesses credible, noted the appellant’s flight (he was at large from around August 1996 until his arrest in January 1998), and convicted him of murder.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in giving full faith and credence to the prosecution’s version and disregarding defense evidence.
2. Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. On the first issue, the Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility, finding no reason to deviate from its findings. It ruled that the alleged inconsistencies in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses Vic and Jenny Villegas were minor and did not detract from their overall credibility; in fact, their narrations on the principal occurrence were consistent. Their positive identification of the appellant was credible given their proximity to the victim and the sufficient illumination. The Court found the defense witnesses’ testimonies lacking in credibility, as they did not come forward during the preliminary investigation despite knowing the appellant’s alleged innocence, and their testimonies were inconsistent on material points. The appellant’s flight was a strong indication of guilt. On the second issue, the Court affirmed the finding of murder qualified by treachery. The attack was sudden and from behind, giving the victim no opportunity to defend himself. The Court modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua (not “40 years reclusion perpetua”) and affirmed the awards of civil indemnity (P50,000), actual damages (P20,000), and moral damages (P50,000).