GR 88662; (June, 1990) (Digest)
G.R. No. 88662 June 18, 1990
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. NESTOR ESPEJO y ESPINO, PABLO PAPIONA y CAHIPE and GENARO AGUIRRE, accused. NESTOR ESPEJO, accused-appellant.
FACTS
In the evening of June 12, 1986, an intruder entered the house of Police Corporal Jose Salonga in San Jose del Monte, Bulacan. The assailant, armed with an Armalite rifle, fired at the sleeping victim, killing him instantly. The victim’s wife, Pilar Salonga, awoke and saw the gunman at the foot of their bed. She screamed as the assailant fled. Initially, in a statement given to police investigators on June 13, Pilar stated she saw the gunman but could not recognize his face. However, on June 30, 1986, after appellant Nestor Espejo and co-accused Pablo Papiona were apprehended, Pilar gave a sworn statement to the PC CIS. In a line-up, she positively identified Espejo as the gunman she saw shoot her husband.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the positive identification of the appellant by the eyewitness, Pilar Salonga, is credible and sufficient to sustain a conviction for murder beyond reasonable doubt, despite her initial statement that she could not recognize the assailant.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the credibility of Pilar Salonga’s positive identification. The initial statement, where she claimed she could not recognize the gunman, was logically explained by her state of extreme shock, fear, and confusion immediately following the traumatic event. The Court found her subsequent sworn identification, made after she had regained her composure, to be credible, straightforward, and unwavering even under cross-examination. Her testimony was corroborated by the extrajudicial admission of appellant Espejo to Major Romeo Maganto, which the Court ruled was admissible. This admission was not part of a formal custodial investigation requiring counsel but was a spontaneous statement made during an initial interview. The Court emphasized that the testimony of a single eyewitness, if positive and credible, is sufficient to support a conviction. All elements of murder, committed with treachery (alevosia) as the victim was attacked while asleep and defenseless, were duly proven. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and an indemnity of P30,000.00 were affirmed.