G.R. No. L-32515 September 10, 1981
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MARIANO CANIZARES, FERMIN CANIZARES, and ANTONIO CAÑIZARES, defendants, FERMIN CANIZARES, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

In the early morning of May 24, 1966, armed men broke into the house of Patricio Delima in Padada, Davao del Sur. The intruders, dressed in fatigues, tied up the family members, including Patricio, his daughter Primitiva, and granddaughter Eufrosina. They ransacked the house, stealing cash and valuables amounting to P10,854.00. During the robbery, defendant-appellant Fermin Canizares dragged Primitiva Delima into a room and, despite her protests and her state of menstruation, forcibly had sexual intercourse with her. The victims positively identified Fermin and his co-accused, Mariano and Antonio Canizares, as the perpetrators. Eufrosina Delima provided a detailed account of the events, which was corroborated by Primitiva’s testimony describing the rape.
The defense presented an alibi, claiming Fermin was at home in a different barrio at the time of the crime. To support this, they presented a sworn statement from a neighbor and Fermin’s own testimony that he was engaged in household chores. The trial court, however, found the prosecution witnesses credible and convicted all accused of Robbery in Band with Rape, sentencing them to life imprisonment. Fermin Canizares appealed, challenging the credibility of the identification and the sufficiency of the evidence.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant based on the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, despite the defense of alibi and alleged inconsistencies.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility, emphasizing the settled rule that appellate courts generally defer to the factual findings of the trial court, which had the direct opportunity to observe the witnesses’ demeanor and assess their truthfulness. The positive identification by Eufrosina and Primitiva Delima, who had a clear view of the appellant during the traumatic incident, was found to be credible and consistent. Their testimonies directly placed Fermin Canizares at the scene, participating in the robbery and committing the rape.
The defense of alibi was correctly rejected for being inherently weak and unsubstantiated. For an alibi to prevail, it must be physically impossible for the accused to have been at the crime scene. The appellant failed to demonstrate this impossibility, as the distance between his claimed location and the crime scene was not insurmountable. The Court found no compelling reason to overturn the trial court’s findings, as the defense did not show that the lower court overlooked any facts of weight that would alter the conclusion. The crime of Robbery with Rape under Article 294(2) of the Revised Penal Code was duly proven beyond reasonable doubt. The Court thus sustained the conviction and ordered the appellant to indemnify the heirs of Patricio Delima for the stolen property and to pay P12,000.00 to the rape victim, Primitiva Delima.