GR 90197; (May, 1992) (Digest)
G.R. No. 90197 May 22, 1992
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOSEPH FAGYAN, alias KISEP, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
On the evening of January 12, 1982, Elsie de Castro fetched her husband Rogelio from a drinking session. While waiting on a dark street, a man approached Rogelio from behind, put an arm on his shoulder, and stabbed him. Elsie, standing a meter away, switched on a flashlight as the assailant fled, enabling her to see his face and leather jacket. Rogelio was taken to the hospital, where he told a friend, Ariston Mazo, that his assailant was “the person with whom we had a misunderstanding,” referring to an earlier altercation that night between the accused-appellant Joseph Fagyan and another friend, Sabas Camil. Rogelio died hours later. Fagyan was charged with murder. The prosecution’s primary witness was Elsie, who positively identified Fagyan as the killer. Fagyan presented an alibi, claiming he was at the Mankayan National High School butchering a dog at the time of the stabbing, later attending a wake. The trial court convicted Fagyan of murder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court erred in convicting the accused-appellant based on the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, particularly the eyewitness identification by Elsie de Castro, despite alleged improbabilities and inconsistencies, and in rejecting the defense of alibi.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the civil indemnity. The Court held that the positive identification by eyewitness Elsie de Castro was credible and sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court found her testimony convincing despite defense claims of improbability, noting that her actions (e.g., flashing the light at the fleeing assailant instead of immediately aiding her husband) did not undermine her credibility, as people react differently to shocking events. The Court also ruled that the victim’s statement to Mazo was admissible as part of the res gestae but was not essential given Elsie’s direct testimony. Fagyan’s alibi was rejected because the crime scene was only a few hundred meters from the high school, making it physically possible for him to have committed the crime and then gone to the alibi location. The constitutional presumption of innocence was deemed overcome by the positive identification. The civil indemnity was increased to P50,000.00.