G.R. No. L-25856; April 29, 1968
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JACINTO RICAPLAZA @ TOTING RICAPLAZA, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Jacinto Ricaplaza was charged with robbery in band with homicide, along with five unidentified persons, for events occurring on June 18, 1962, in Padidu, Glan, Cotabato. After trial, the Court of First Instance of Cotabato convicted him of robbery with homicide only, as the evidence did not establish the number of robbers. He was sentenced to reclusión perpetua, ordered to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Francisco Poncardas, and to pay for stolen items. The stolen property included a shotgun, jewelry, a transistor radio, cash, a wristwatch, and goggles. The prosecution’s case relied heavily on the testimonies of two child witnesses, Lucia Ferolino (granddaughter of the deceased) and Josefina Bigapria (a ward of the deceased), both aged 12 at the time of the trial. They testified that they had met and served the appellant during his two-day stay at the victim’s house in May 1962. On the night of the crime, they witnessed the appellant enter the house, point a gun at Poncardas, and shoot him during a struggle. They also identified the appellant when he blocked their escape from the kitchen, recognizing him by the light of electric bulbs and by scars on his face. They later identified him in a jail lineup. The defense challenged the credibility of these witnesses due to their age, relationship to the deceased, and the stressful circumstances, and presented confessions from two other individuals (Alfredo Fernandez and Remigio Arzula) admitting to the crime but not implicating the appellant.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant based on the identification and testimonies of the child witnesses, and in disregarding the confessions of Fernandez and Arzula that did not implicate the appellant.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The testimonies of Lucia Ferolino and Josefina Bigapria were found credible, consistent, and given in a straightforward manner despite rigorous cross-examination. Their prior acquaintance with the appellant from his two-day stay in May 1962 provided a sufficient basis for recognition, and the one-month interval did not impair their memory. The Court held that the relationship of the witnesses to the victim, absent any showing of improper motive, does not diminish the weight of their positive identification. The confessions of Fernandez and Arzula were deemed involuntary and obtained under pressure after prolonged interrogation, and thus properly disregarded by the trial court. The decision of the lower court was upheld in accordance with law and evidence.