GR 94494; (March, 1996) (Digest)
G.R. No. 94494. March 15, 1996.
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Dionisio Lapura y Cajan, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On February 19, 1988, Petronilo Lim, a special agent, was shot and killed while driving along Honorio Lopez Blvd., Balut, Tondo, Manila. The prosecution’s eyewitness, Edgardo Samson, testified that he saw two persons attack the victim’s car. He later identified appellant Dionisio Lapura in a police line-up as the person positioned at the left side of the car who fired a .45 caliber pistol. The autopsy revealed the victim died from multiple gunshot wounds fired at close range. The defense interposed alibi, claiming appellant was asleep at his sister’s house at the time of the shooting. Appellant was convicted of murder by the Regional Trial Court and sentenced to reclusion perpetua.
ISSUE
1. Whether the trial court erred in not dismissing the case due to alleged defects in the filing of the information and the certification of preliminary investigation.
2. Whether the trial court erred in giving credence to the testimony of eyewitness Edgardo Samson, despite alleged inconsistencies, and in convicting appellant.
RULING
1. On the procedural issues: The Supreme Court found no merit in appellant’s claims. The certification of the investigating fiscal stated the information was filed with the prior authority and approval of the City Fiscal, and absent contrary evidence, the presumption of regularity in official functions stands. The alleged deficiency in the certification does not invalidate the information, as such certification is not an indispensable part of it. Furthermore, the question of improper preliminary investigation should have been raised prior to arraignment, which appellant did not do.
2. On the merits of the case: The Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of the eyewitness testimony. The alleged contradictions in Samson’s statements were minor and did not affect his positive identification of appellant. The witness’s testimony was found to be credible and consistent on material points. The defense of alibi was weak and could not prevail over the positive identification. The Court affirmed the conviction for murder. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was properly appreciated, as the attack was sudden and unexpected, giving the victim no opportunity to defend himself. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed, and civil indemnity was awarded to the victim’s heirs.