GR 152263; (July, 2009) (Digest)
G.R. No. 152263; July 3, 2009
ARTHUR ZARATE, Petitioner, vs. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 43, GINGOOG CITY, MISAMIS ORIENTAL, Respondent.
FACTS
The prosecution established that on April 1, 1994, Ernesto Guiritan was seated outside a church when petitioner Arthur Zarate approached him. After Guiritan could not provide a cigarette, Zarate immediately stabbed him with a switchblade knife and fled. Guiritan sustained a critical stab wound penetrating his small intestine and colon, and a deep laceration on his penis. Immediate surgical intervention prevented his death, as confirmed by medical testimony that the wounds would have been fatal without timely treatment. Guiritan positively identified Zarate as his assailant, noting he knew him from prior town fiestas and a previous accidental sexual encounter.
Zarate interposed the defense of alibi, claiming he was at his house, approximately 200 meters away, helping decorate an altar for a religious activity from 10:00 p.m. to midnight on the night of the incident. He presented a corroborating witness, Geronima Cuerdo, who testified she was watching him during that period. However, she admitted it was possible for individuals around the altar to leave without her observation.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court’s conviction of Arthur Zarate for the crime of frustrated homicide.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s factual findings, emphasizing that the positive identification of the accused by the victim, who had prior knowledge of him, prevails over the defense of alibi. For alibi to prosper, the accused must demonstrate not only his presence elsewhere but also the physical impossibility of being at the crime scene. Here, Zarate’s house was merely 200 meters from the crime location, a distance easily traversable in minutes, thus negating any physical impossibility. The Court also sustained the trial court’s correct appreciation of the crime. While the Information alleged frustrated murder, the prosecution failed to prove the qualifying circumstances of treachery or evident premeditation. Consequently, the crime was properly downgraded to frustrated homicide, as all acts of execution were performed, producing a fatal wound, but the victim’s death was prevented solely by timely medical assistance independent of the accused’s will. The penalty imposed and the award of actual damages for medical expenses were affirmed.