G.R. No. L-30492 February 26, 1981
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JESUS OMBAO, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Jesus Ombao, along with Agustin Dignos and numerous others, was charged with Robbery with Homicide. The information alleged that on June 10, 1967, in Padada, Davao del Sur, a band of armed men robbed several establishments and individuals, taking a total of P27,000. During the robbery, they shot and killed Felicitas Zozobrado and inflicted injuries on two others. The trial court found Ombao guilty and imposed the death penalty. His co-accused Dignos pleaded guilty and was sentenced to reclusion perpetua. Ombao appealed, arguing the prosecution failed to prove his identity as a participant beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution’s case relied heavily on the testimonies of victims who identified Ombao. Witnesses placed him at the scene, with one victim, Virginia Rama, testifying he was among the armed men who boarded a cargo truck used in the robbery and that he even kissed her during the incident. The defense centered on alibi, claiming Ombao was elsewhere. The trial court rejected the alibi, giving credence to the positive identification by the witnesses.

ISSUE

Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of accused-appellant Jesus Ombao for the crime of Robbery with Homicide beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed Ombao’s conviction but modified the penalty. The Court upheld the trial court’s findings on credibility, ruling that the positive identification by eyewitnesses, who had a clear view of the accused during the well-lit robbery, prevails over the weak defense of alibi. The Court found the witnesses’ testimonies, particularly Virginia Rama’s detailed account of Ombao’s specific act, to be credible and sufficient to establish his direct participation in the criminal conspiracy.
However, the Court modified the penalty from death to reclusion perpetua. While the crime was committed by a band, which is an aggravating circumstance, the Court applied the ruling in People vs. Apduhan, Jr., which requires that the element of band must be alleged in the information and proven during trial as a qualifying circumstance for the imposition of the higher penalty. In this case, although the information alleged the robbers acted “in band,” the Court, in a divided vote, ultimately held that the aggravating circumstance of band was not proven to qualify the crime for the death penalty under the applicable law at the time. Consequently, with no other aggravating circumstance, the proper penalty is reclusion perpetua. The Court also affirmed the civil indemnities awarded by the trial court.