G.R. No. 94548 October 4, 1996
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. GERARDO “Nonoy” COGONON, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On October 14, 1985, a police team from Calatrava, Negros Occidental, responded to a report of armed men in Barangay Lemery. While returning from their patrol, their vehicle was ambushed by a group of armed men, resulting in the deaths of three policemen and injuries to four others. Prosecution witnesses, including surviving victims Pfc. Camelo Algaba and P/Sgt. Epifanio Mercado, positively identified appellant Gerardo Cogonon as one of the ambushers. The defense presented alibi, claiming Cogonon was elsewhere at the time, and denial, arguing the witnesses could not have identified him in the dark.
The Regional Trial Court convicted Cogonon of multiple murder and multiple frustrated murder, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua. The court acquitted his co-accused, Andres Delima, Jr., due to reasonable doubt. Cogonon appealed, arguing the trial court erred in giving credence to the prosecution witnesses and in convicting him despite alleged weaknesses in the evidence.

ISSUE

The primary issues were: (1) the credibility of the prosecution witnesses and the sufficiency of their identification of the appellant; (2) the validity of the defenses of alibi and denial; and (3) the propriety of imposing the death penalty in light of Republic Act No. 7659.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalties. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility, noting that the testimonies of the surviving policemen were clear, consistent, and credible. They had a clear view of the appellant during the ambush, as the area was illuminated by moonlight and the headlights of the patrol vehicle. The defenses of alibi and denial were correctly rejected, as alibi is inherently weak and cannot prevail over positive identification. The Court also found the qualifying circumstance of treachery to be present, as the attack was sudden and unexpected, rendering the victims defenseless.
Regarding the penalty, the Court ruled that the death penalty could not be imposed. While Republic Act No. 7659, which restored the death penalty, took effect while the appeal was pending, the crime was committed in 1985 and the trial court promulgated its decision in 1989. At both times, the 1987 Constitution, which prohibited the death penalty, was in effect. The Court applied the rule that a penalty cannot be imposed if it was not prescribed by law at the time of the commission of the felony. Thus, the penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed. The Court further found that the acts against the four injured policemen constituted attempted murder, not frustrated murder, as the prosecution failed to prove that the injuries were fatal. Accordingly, the appellant was also convicted of four counts of attempted murder.