GR No. 123456 | Date: January 15, 2023 | Title: People of the Philippines v. Juan Dela Cruz*

FACTS:
1. Juan Dela Cruz was charged with the crime of Murder for allegedly stabbing Pedro Santos.
2. During the trial, the prosecution presented an eyewitness, Maria Reyes, who testified that she saw Dela Cruz stab Santos.
3. The defense presented an alibi, claiming Dela Cruz was in a different city at the time of the crime.
4. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Dela Cruz of Murder, finding the testimony of the eyewitness credible and the alibi weak.
5. Dela Cruz appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed the RTC’s decision.
6. Dela Cruz now appeals to the Supreme Court via a Petition for Review on Certiorari, arguing that the lower courts erred in giving credence to the eyewitness testimony and in not considering his alibi.

Whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the conviction of Juan Dela Cruz for Murder.

*
The Petition is DENIED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED.

The Supreme Court held that the findings of fact of the trial court, especially when affirmed by the Court of Appeals, are generally binding and conclusive. The assessment of the credibility of witnesses is best undertaken by the trial court, which had the opportunity to observe their demeanor and conduct on the stand. In this case, both the RTC and the CA found the eyewitness testimony of Maria Reyes to be clear, consistent, and credible. Her positive identification of the accused prevails over the defense of alibi, which is inherently weak and easily fabricated. For alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was elsewhere when the crime was committed but also that it was physically impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime. Dela Cruz failed to prove such physical impossibility. Therefore, no reversible error was committed by the lower courts.

AI Generated.