G.R. No. 123456, *People v. Dela Cruz*, July 15, 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 prevail over the eyewitness identification.

ISSUE

Whether the conviction of accused-appellant Juan Dela Cruz for the crime of Murder is supported by proof beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

NO. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction and acquitted accused-appellant Juan Dela Cruz. The Court held that the prosecution failed to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The lone eyewitness identification was fraught with serious inconsistencies regarding the lighting conditions and the witness’s distance from the event, rendering it unreliable. The Court reiterated the doctrine that alibi, while inherently weak, must be accepted when the prosecution’s evidence is itself weak and does not constitute moral certainty. The identity of the perpetrator not having been established with certainty, Dela Cruz is entitled to an acquittal. The Court ordered his immediate release from detention unless he is being held for another lawful cause.