G.R. No. 90802 , August 4, 1992
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. TOM CHANAS y PITAN, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On August 2, 1988, at around 9:00 PM at Km. 73 along the Halsema National Highway in Buguias, Benguet, the spouses Jaime and Marina Benos, their driver Edwin Sarol, and neighbor Alfonso Malicdan were traveling in an ELF Mazda truck after selling vegetables in Baguio City. The truck stopped due to stones blocking the highway. Two men appeared; one was positively identified as accused-appellant Tom Chanas. Chanas, with his face partially covered by a handkerchief, approached the driver’s side and poked a gun at Edwin Sarol, while his companion went to the other side. They announced a holdup and demanded money. When Alfonso Malicdan said they had no money, the gunmen fired shots, hitting Edwin Sarol in the right eye and Alfonso Malicdan in the jaw. Marina Benos then handed her bag containing P20,000.00 cash and personal documents to Chanas. The holduppers fired again, hitting Marina in the back, before fleeing. Edwin Sarol was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital. Marina and Alfonso survived their injuries. The prosecution presented Marina Benos and Alfonso Malicdan, who consistently identified Chanas as one of the perpetrators, citing the illumination from the truck’s headlights. The defense presented an alibi, claiming Chanas was at a Coca-Cola warehouse in Abatan, Buguias, at the time, and later dining at a restaurant, supported by witnesses Tirso Meron and Pedro Bestre. The trial court convicted Chanas of Highway Robbery with Homicide under P.D. 532 and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, with damages awarded to the victims.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in: (1) finding that accused-appellant was positively identified; (2) rejecting his defense of alibi and not giving weight to his witnesses’ testimonies; and (3) giving credence to the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies despite alleged inconsistencies.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision.
(1) The positive identification of accused-appellant by prosecution witnesses Marina Benos and Alfonso Malicdan was credible and reliable. They testified that the truck’s headlights provided sufficient illumination, allowing them to see Chanas clearly as he approached, even before he covered his face with a handkerchief. Their testimonies were consistent and without material inconsistencies or ulterior motives.
(2) The defense of alibi was properly rejected. For alibi to prevail, it must be physically impossible for the accused to be at the crime scene. Here, the distance between the crime scene (Km. 73) and the alleged location of Chanas (Abatan, approximately Km. 85) was not insurmountable, making it possible for him to have committed the crime and returned. The defense witnesses’ testimonies did not overcome the positive identification.
(3) The alleged inconsistencies in the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies were minor and did not affect their credibility on material points. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is generally upheld unless shown to be arbitrary.
The Court modified the damages: the award of P20,000.00 each to Marina Benos and Alfonso Malicdan for injuries was deemed moral damages under Article 2217 of the Civil Code, in addition to the P60,000.00 indemnity for Edwin Sarol’s death and P20,000.00 actual damages to Marina Benos. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed, as the death penalty under P.D. 532 is reduced to reclusion perpetua under the 1987 Constitution .