G.R. No. 256856 , August 12, 2024
TOMMY CARIÑO A.K.A. “TOMMY ECHAVEZ”, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

FACTS

Petitioner Tommy Cariño was charged with three counts of murder for the deaths of Marlon Joshua Layno Young, Solidad Ypanto, and Virginia Lim Sesbreño on February 1, 2012, in Talisay City, Cebu. The prosecution’s case primarily relied on the testimony and identification of eyewitness Rafael Chan, Jr., a barangay councilor. Chan and four barangay tanods were in a multicab when they heard gunshots. Chan saw two men on a motorcycle without helmets and a plate number; the backrider changed a magazine as their eyes met. The motorcycle sped off, and the witnesses later found the three victims in a pick-up truck. The following day, a cartographic sketch of the backrider was prepared based on the description given by witness Glicerio Icot, not Chan. Police then showed Chan and the others this sketch along with over a hundred pictures from a rogue gallery, from which they identified Cariño as the backrider and Junefer Mahilum as the driver. Cariño denied involvement, claiming he was at a drinking session from the afternoon until evening of February 1, 2012, an alibi corroborated by Barangay Captain Mark Ferdinand Bas. The Regional Trial Court convicted Cariño of three counts of homicide, downgraded from murder, crediting Chan’s identification and rejecting the alibi. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction with modifications to the damages. Cariño appealed to the Supreme Court.

ISSUE

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming Cariño’s conviction based on the out-of-court identification made through a cartographic sketch derived from another witness’s description and subsequent photo lineup, which he claims was unreliable and insufficient to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court GRANTED the petition, REVERSED and SET ASIDE the Decision of the Court of Appeals, and ACQUITTED petitioner Tommy Cariño on the ground of reasonable doubt. The Court held that the out-of-court identification was unreliable and insufficient to overcome the presumption of innocence. The cartographic sketch was not based on the description of the identifying witness, Chan, but on another person (Icot), which impaired its reliability and introduced suggestiveness. The subsequent identification from a rogue gallery photo lineup, conducted after witnesses were shown the sketch, was tainted by this improper procedure. The identification did not meet the standards of reliability required for admissibility, as it was not independent and was potentially influenced by the prior sketch. The prosecution’s evidence, resting solely on this flawed identification, failed to establish Cariño’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court emphasized that an accused cannot be convicted based on an identification that is uncertain, impaired with suggestiveness, and derived from an unreliable source.