GR 145475; (November, 2001) (Digest)
G.R. No. 145475 ; November 22, 2001
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EUSEBIO PUNSALAN, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On September 2, 1997, Bonifacio David was fatally shot in front of his store in Apalit, Pampanga. The prosecution evidence established that two men on a motorcycle approached. The passenger, later identified as accused-appellant Eusebio Punsalan, alighted, confirmed the victim’s identity, and then shot him four times with a .38 caliber gun. The victim’s son, Dante David, witnessed the shooting, rushed to the scene, and was held at gunpoint by the assailant, whom he positively recognized as Punsalan. The victim’s widow, Flora, and daughter-in-law, Josephine, also witnessed the event and corroborated the account. The defense presented an alibi, claiming Punsalan was at home celebrating his deceased mother’s birth anniversary. He also alleged he was framed, arrested through a ruse, and that police manipulated his appearance for identification.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused-appellant beyond reasonable doubt, particularly concerning the credibility of the eyewitness identification and the defense of alibi.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for murder. The Court found the positive identification by eyewitness Dante David to be credible, natural, and consistent. He had a clear, unobstructed view of the assailant from a short distance during a well-lit morning incident, and his recognition was immediate. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected, as it was not physically impossible for Punsalan to have been at the crime scene given the proximity of his residence. The claim of frame-up was unsupported by evidence and could not prevail over the positive testimony. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was duly established, as the mode of attack—confirming the victim’s identity and then suddenly shooting him—ensured the execution without risk to the assailant. The Court modified the damages, awarding civil indemnity and moral damages but deleting the unsubstantiated award for actual damages.