G.R. No. L-17822; October 30, 1962
The People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Leopoldo Domenden and Eufemio Segundo, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

On January 16, 1958, around 1:00 a.m., Jovita Antolin, her son Pedro Antolin Jr., and three companions were walking home in Barrio Dayangki, Burgos, Ilocos Sur, after attending a zarzuela. They overtook accused-appellants Leopoldo Domenden and Eufemio Segundo on the road. The appellants then hurried ahead, looked back at the group, suddenly knelt, and without warning fired a fusillade from a .45 caliber pistol and a carbine. Jaime Foronda and Jovencio Ismael were killed instantly. Pedro Antolin Jr. was mortally wounded, and Jovita Antolin was shot when she cried out to the appellants. The assailants, after checking the victims and kicking one, departed believing all were dead. Jovita, though wounded, managed to crawl for help. Pedro Jr. later died in the hospital.
The defense was alibi and denial. Appellants claimed they were at the municipal building that night due to a separate stabbing incident involving one Teofilo Vitalis. They asserted they heard the gunfire from a distance and that some policemen responded, while they remained at the municipal building or went home. They suggested the prosecution witnesses, Jovita and another, were motivated by resentment due to past gambling raids conducted by appellant Segundo.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution evidence, particularly the positive identification by eyewitnesses, sufficiently establishes the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt, thereby overcoming their defenses of alibi and denial.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The positive, direct, and straightforward testimonies of eyewitness Jovita Antolin, who clearly identified the appellants as the assailants, prevailed over the weak and unreliable defense of alibi. The Court found the alibi unpersuasive as the appellants failed to demonstrate it was physically impossible for them to have been at the crime scene. The municipal building was only 2.5 kilometers away, and Segundo’s house was merely 70 meters from it, making it feasible for them to have committed the crime and returned. The Court also noted established motives: Domenden had an earlier altercation with victim Foronda and harbored resentment against Jovita, whom he suspected of an illicit relationship with Foronda. Furthermore, the trial court correctly denied the motion for a new trial based on alleged retractions, as these did not constitute newly discovered evidence and would not alter the verdict given the strength of the trial evidence. Finding conspiracy, both appellants were held liable for the crimes. The decision convicting them of multiple murder for the deaths of Foronda, Ismael, and Pedro Antolin Jr., and frustrated murder for the shooting of Jovita Antolin, was affirmed.