G.R. No. 141120 , September 17, 2003
People of the Philippines, Appellee, vs. Fernando Buenavidez alias “Nanding Bedea,” Appellant.

FACTS

The appellant, Fernando Buenavidez, was charged with the murder of Ferdinand Dariagan on February 12, 1995, in Roxas City. The prosecution presented eyewitnesses George Patanao and Benjamin Mamburan, who testified that around 9:30 p.m., they saw the victim alight from a tricycle and urinate by the roadside. Appellant then approached from the direction of a barangay chapel, placed his arm over the victim’s shoulder, and stabbed him multiple times with a knife, causing the victim to fall. Dr. Milagrosa Resolosa, who conducted the post-mortem examination, confirmed the victim died from multiple stab wounds.
The appellant interposed the defense of alibi, claiming he was in Barangay Dumaguit, Aklan, tending to a farm at the time of the incident, a claim corroborated by a co-employee. The Regional Trial Court convicted appellant of murder, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, and ordered him to pay damages to the victim’s heirs. Appellant appealed, arguing inconsistencies in the prosecution’s evidence and the weakness of his alibi defense.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the appellant’s guilt for the crime of murder beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in light of alleged inconsistencies in eyewitness testimonies and the viability of the appellant’s alibi.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the awarded damages. The Court found no merit in the appellant’s claim of material inconsistencies. The discrepancy between one witness stating the appellant “thrust ‘something'” and another explicitly describing multiple stabs was deemed minor and did not detract from the consistent core narrative of the appellant’s direct assault. The location of the wounds on the victim’s left side was also logically consistent with the eyewitness account of the appellant approaching and attacking from the victim’s left.
The defense of alibi was correctly rejected. For alibi to prevail, the accused must prove not only his presence elsewhere but also the physical impossibility of being at the crime scene. The appellant failed to establish this impossibility, as Barangay Dumaguit was not so distant from Roxas City as to preclude his presence. Alibi is inherently weak and cannot prevail over the positive identification by credible eyewitnesses, which the Court found the prosecution witnesses to be. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was duly proven, as the attack was sudden and from behind, leaving the victim no opportunity to defend himself. The Court modified the damages, awarding P34,800.00 as actual damages (based on receipts), P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, but deleted the award for loss of earning capacity due to lack of sufficient documentary evidence.