G.R. No. 98069 January 27, 1993
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RAMON FLORES and RENATO MACABIOG, accused-appellants.

FACTS

Accused Ramon Flores and Renato Macabiog were charged with Murder for the killing of Camilo Mamuyac on the evening of October 15, 1979, in Currimao, Ilocos Norte. The information alleged treachery, evident premeditation, and the aggravating circumstance of nighttime. Both pleaded not guilty. After trial, the trial court convicted Ramon Flores of Murder, sentencing him to Reclusion Temporal in its maximum period (17 years, 4 months, and 1 day to 20 years) and ordering him to indemnify the victim’s heirs P30,000.00. Accused Renato Macabiog was acquitted for insufficiency of evidence. Flores appealed to the Court of Appeals, which found him guilty but determined the penalty should be Reclusion Perpetua and increased the civil indemnity. Citing Rule 124, Section 12, the appellate court certified the case to the Supreme Court for final determination.
The prosecution evidence established that on the evening of October 15, 1979, between 6:00 and 7:00 p.m., the victim Camilo Mamuyac and his wife Evangeline were in their kitchen. A gunshot was fired. Evangeline saw a flare and heard her husband say he was shot. She peeped through the bamboo slits of their “batalan” and saw accused Ramon Flores face to face, about 55 centimeters away, looking up at her. She recognized him clearly as they were neighbors and the area was illuminated by electric bulbs. The victim died from multiple gunshot wounds. An autopsy revealed nine gunshot entrance wounds and other injuries, with cause of death being shock due to multiple gunshot wounds. Appellant’s hands tested positive for nitrates. A shotgun was recovered and found to have been recently fired. A motive was established through testimony of a prior altercation on October 1, 1979, where Flores threatened to kill the victim. Evangeline executed a sworn statement identifying Flores as the gunman on November 11, 1979.
The defense, interposing denial and alibi, presented Soledad Flores (appellant’s mother) and appellant himself. Soledad testified that appellant was at home conversing with siblings and later sleeping at the time of the incident. Appellant claimed he was at home and that the positive nitrate test was due to him spraying mango trees with potassium nitrate that afternoon.

ISSUE

The main issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of accused-appellant Ramon Flores for the crime of Murder beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction with modifications. The Court found the appeal devoid of merit. It held that the testimony of eyewitness Evangeline Mamuyac was credible, natural, and worthy of belief. Her act of peeping immediately after the shooting was a natural reaction of a wife concerned for her husband’s assailant. The delay in her sworn statement did not impair her credibility, as it was sufficiently explained by her fear and the need for police assurance. The testimony of a single credible eyewitness is sufficient to support a conviction. The defense of alibi failed because appellant did not prove it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene. The positive identification by the eyewitness, the positive nitrate findings, and the established motive overcame the defense of alibi and denial. The inconsistencies in the defense testimonies were material and vital.
The Court modified the penalty. Applying People vs. Muñoz, it held that Article III, Section 19(1) of the Constitution only prohibits the death penalty and reduces it to reclusion perpetua, without changing the periods of the penalty prescribed by Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code. Thus, the proper penalty is reclusion perpetua. The civil indemnity was increased to P50,000.00 in line with prevailing jurisprudence. The judgment of the trial court was AFFIRMED with these modifications.