GR No. 123456, *People v. Dela Cruz* (2020)

FACTS: Accused-appellant Juan Dela Cruz was charged with the crime of Murder for the fatal stabbing of the victim. During the trial, the prosecution presented an eyewitness who positively identified Dela Cruz as the perpetrator. The defense, however, presented an alibi, claiming Dela Cruz was in a different city at the time of the incident. The Regional Trial Court convicted Dela Cruz of Murder, qualified by treachery, and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Dela Cruz appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that his alibi should have been given credence.

ISSUE

Whether the guilt of the accused-appellant for the crime of Murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court acquitted accused-appellant Juan Dela Cruz. The Court held that the prosecution’s evidence was insufficient to overcome the constitutional presumption of innocence. The lone eyewitness identification was fraught with serious doubts, as the witness admitted to having only a fleeting glimpse of the assailant under poor lighting conditions. The Court reiterated that alibi is inherently weak, but it may be credited when the prosecution’s evidence is equally weak and does not constitute moral certainty of guilt. Here, the totality of the prosecution’s evidence failed to meet the required standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the Court reversed the decisions of the lower courts and ordered the immediate release of the accused-appellant from detention, unless he is being held for another lawful cause.