G.R. No. 89369 June 9, 1997
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROLANDO BERGONIA, ROLDAN BERGONIA, ROSELY BERGONIA and VIRGILIO AMBALIZA, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

Accused-appellants were charged with Murder for the killing of Joel Primavera on May 7, 1988, in Banog Norte, Bani, Pangasinan. The prosecution evidence established that in the afternoon of said date, Primavera, together with Lim Reniedo and tricycle driver Patrocinio Torres, were ambushed and fired upon by the accused-appellants while traveling on a tricycle. Primavera ran and sought refuge inside the house of Agustin Ramolete, the barangay secretary. He entered Ramolete’s house, held onto Ramolete’s children and later his mother-in-law, pleading for help. Ramolete saw appellant Rolando Bergonia pursuing Primavera to his gate, armed. Ramolete also saw co-accused Rosely Bergonia, Roldan Bergonia, and Virgilio Ambaliza, all armed, standing by his fence. Shots were fired inside the house. Ramolete later saw the appellants dragging Primavera’s dead body out of his house. The autopsy revealed Primavera died from shock due to hemorrhage secondary to three gunshot wounds, two of which were fatal. Accused-appellants Roldan Bergonia, Rosely Bergonia, and Virgilio Ambaliza interposed the defense of alibi, claiming they were elsewhere within the same barangay during the incident. Accused-appellant Rolando Bergonia pointed to a certain Alfredo Catabay as the killer, alleging Primavera and Catabay were quarreling inside Ramolete’s house when the shooting occurred.

ISSUE

Whether the accused-appellants are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of the accused-appellants for Murder. The defense of alibi proffered by Roldan Bergonia, Rosely Bergonia, and Virgilio Ambaliza was properly rejected by the trial court as they were positively identified by prosecution witness Agustin Ramolete, and it was not physically impossible for them to be at the crime scene given the proximity of their claimed locations. The defense of Rolando Bergonia, which sought to implicate another, was found unconvincing and unsupported by evidence. The Court found the collective testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, particularly Ramolete and Reniedo, to be credible and sufficient to establish the appellants’ guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The killing was qualified by treachery, as the attack was sudden and unexpected, denying the victim any chance to defend himself. The Court modified the trial court’s decision by increasing the civil indemnity awarded to the heirs of the victim to P50,000.00 and clarifying that the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, not life imprisonment.