GR L 112238; (November, 1994) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-112238 November 22, 1994
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FELICISIMO MERZA Y DAVIS, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
An Information charged Felicisimo Merza y Davis with rape with homicide under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code. The prosecution evidence established that on October 9, 1990, at around 10:00 a.m., the victim, Generosa “Bingbing” Cordova (12 years old), was with her companions, including Amornina Nagbuya (8), Sonny Boy Nagbuya (9), and Santiago Cordova, in Filinvest, Quezon City. Accused-appellant followed the group, asked who the eldest was, and upon Bingbing’s response, suddenly grabbed her away. When Amornina tried to follow, appellant boxed her. Witnesses Sonny Francisco and Ruel Galor saw appellant pulling the crying victim towards a clubhouse. The following day, October 10, Bingbing’s body was found near a creek. An autopsy confirmed she had been raped and strangled. During police investigation, the child companions described the perpetrator. Appellant was arrested in Talavera, Nueva Ecija. At a police line-up, Amornina Nagbuya, Sonny Boy Nagbuya, and Sonny Francisco positively identified appellant as the man who took the victim. At trial, these witnesses again positively identified appellant in court. The defense of alibi was presented. The trial court found appellant guilty and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordering him to pay damages to the victim’s heirs.
ISSUE
1. Whether the trial court erred in convicting appellant based on the prosecution witnesses’ identification and circumstantial evidence, despite the defense of alibi.
2. Whether the trial court erred in holding appellant liable for damages.
RULING
1. The trial court did not err. The prosecution witnesses (Amornina Nagbuya, Sonny Boy Nagbuya, and Sonny Francisco) positively identified appellant in court as the person who grabbed the victim. Their testimonies were accorded full probative value as they were children of tender years with no ill motive. Appellant’s defense of alibi cannot prevail over positive identification. Furthermore, the conviction was supported by sufficient circumstantial evidence meeting the requirements of Section 4, Rule 133 of the Rules of Court. The circumstances included: appellant grabbing the victim; boxing a companion; being seen pulling the crying victim; the victim’s body being found the next day; the autopsy findings; appellant being the last person seen with the victim; his plea to police to settle the case; and his flight to Nueva Ecija. These circumstances, taken together, lead to a conclusion of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
2. The trial court did not err in awarding damages. The civil liability springs from the criminal act pursuant to Article 100 of the Revised Penal Code and Section 1, Rule 111 of the Rules of Court. The appealed decision was AFFIRMED.