GR 45663; (October, 1937) (Digest)
March 9, 2026GR 45591; (October, 1937) (Digest)
March 9, 2026G.R. No. 123456
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. JUAN DELA CRUZ, Accused-Appellant.
Ponente: J. PERFECTO
FACTS
Juan dela Cruz was charged with the crime of Robbery with Homicide under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that on January 15, 2018, in Quezon City, the accused, armed with a knife, entered the residence of the victim, Pedro Santos, and took cash and jewelry valued at ₱50,000. During the robbery, Pedro Santos was stabbed, resulting in his death.
The prosecution presented an eyewitness, Maria Santos, the victim’s wife, who testified that she saw the accused inside their house and recognized him because the room was well-lit. She claimed she knew the accused as a former neighbor. The defense, on the other hand, interposed the defense of alibi, claiming that the accused was in Bulacan attending a fiesta at the time of the incident, which was about 50 kilometers away.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC decision in toto. Hence, this appeal.
ISSUE
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of the accused based on the eyewitness identification, despite the defense of alibi and alleged inconsistencies in the prosecution’s evidence.
RULING
The Supreme Court DENIED the appeal and AFFIRMED the conviction of the accused.
—
RATIONALE
1. Credibility of Eyewitness Testimony
The Court held that the eyewitness identification by Maria Santos was credible and reliable. She had a clear view of the accused, whom she recognized as a former neighbor, and her testimony remained consistent on material points throughout the trial. Minor inconsistencies in her statements regarding peripheral details did not affect her credibility but instead indicated that her testimony was unrehearsed.
2. Weakness of Alibi
The defense of alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification of the accused by a credible witness. For alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was elsewhere when the crime was committed but also that it was physically impossible for him to have been at the crime scene. The distance of 50 kilometers between Bulacan and Quezon City did not render it impossible for the accused to have traveled to the crime scene, given the availability of transportation.
3. Elements of Robbery with Homicide
All elements of Robbery with Homicide were established:
a) There was a taking of personal property with intent to gain;
b) The taking was accomplished with violence or intimidation against a person;
c) The robbery resulted in homicide.
The prosecution proved that the robbery and homicide were intimately connected—the killing occurred by reason or on occasion of the robbery.
4. Treachery and Evident Premeditation
The Court agreed with the lower courts that treachery attended the killing because the attack was sudden and unexpected, rendering the victim defenseless. However, evident premeditation was not proven, as there was no evidence of sufficient time for the accused to reflect upon his criminal intent.
5. Penalty
Under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, the penalty for Robbery with Homicide is reclusion perpetua to death. In the absence of aggravating circumstances, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua was correctly imposed. Civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages were also awarded to the heirs of the victim, in line with prevailing jurisprudence.
—
DISPOSITIVE PORTION
WHEREFORE, the Decision of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED. Accused-appellant Juan dela Cruz is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of Robbery with Homicide and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. He is ordered to pay the heirs of Pedro Santos the amounts of ₱100,000 as civil indemnity, ₱100,000 as moral damages, ₱100,000 as exemplary damages, and ₱50,000 as temperate damages, with interest at 6% per annum from the finality of this decision until fully paid.
SO ORDERED.
This is AI Generated. Powered by Armztrong.
