GR 185849; (April, 2010) (Digest)
G.R. No. 185849 ; April 7, 2010
People of the Philippines, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. Jonjie Esoy y Hungoy, Rolando Ciano y Soledad and Roger Bolalacao y Dadivas, Accused-Appellants.
FACTS
On January 18, 2001, Lorenzo Coro and Andrea Pabalan were riding a jeepney in Manila when appellants boarded. Pabalan became apprehensive as appellants Esoy and Ciano stared at passengers and appeared to be under the influence. Suddenly, Esoy and Ciano drew balisongs and attacked. In the commotion, appellants and other passengers alighted. Pabalan then discovered Coro had a stab wound and his cellphone was missing. Coro was rushed to the hospital but died that night. Pabalan later positively identified appellants in a police lineup.
Appellants denied involvement, presenting an alibi that they were at their workplace in Bacood, Sta. Mesa, Manila, during the incident. Their supervisor, Lauro Dela Cruz, corroborated their employment but could not definitively confirm their presence at the specific time of the crime, as he was not constantly present and kept no time records.
ISSUE
Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that appellants are guilty of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide.
RULING
Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The prosecution successfully established all elements of robbery with homicide through the credible and consistent testimony of eyewitness Andrea Pabalan. Her positive identification of appellants, who were strangers to her, was categorical and remained unshaken during cross-examination. The Court found no ill motive for her to falsely testify. The alibi defense of appellants was inherently weak and could not prevail over Pabalan’s positive identification. For an alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only their presence elsewhere but also the physical impossibility of being at the crime scene. Appellants failed to do so, as their claimed workplace in Bacood, Sta. Mesa, was not shown to be so distant from the crime scene along Taft Avenue, Ermita, Manila, as to preclude their presence. The supervisor’s testimony was insufficient to provide the required certainty. The taking of the cellphone was established through the victim’s dying declaration to Pabalan, and the homicide was a direct consequence of the robbery, satisfying the elements of the complex crime. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was correctly imposed, with corresponding civil liabilities.