G.R. Nos. L-39504-06 January 30, 1984
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. JOHNSON SO, ZOSIMO GRACILLA, NEPTALE GIVERA, ARTURO DIAZ and MOISES GARALDE, accused; NEPTALE GIVERA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Neptale Givera, along with Johnson So, Zosimo Gracilla, Arturo Diaz, and Moises Garalde, were charged with two counts of murder for the deaths of Mayor Luis de Castro and Esteban Gracilla, and one count of frustrated murder against Pat. Ofelio Geronga. The prosecution evidence established that on November 17, 1970, Mayor Johnson So, accompanied by armed men including Givera, went to Mayor de Castro’s house in Bulan, Sorsogon. So confronted and shot de Castro dead. As de Castro’s companions fled, So and others chased and killed Esteban Gracilla. During these shootings, Givera, Diaz, Garalde, and Gracilla were positioned outside, standing guard with long guns. The group later proceeded to a bakery where So shot and wounded Pat. Geronga. After trial, the Circuit Criminal Court found all accused guilty, imposing the death penalty for each murder.
Givera appealed, arguing the trial court erred in its assessment of witness identification and in not appreciating his defense of alibi. He claimed he was serving a subpoena in Sorsogon at the time of the crimes. The other accused either died in an encounter, escaped, or remained at-large, leaving only Givera’s case for automatic review by the Supreme Court due to the death penalty imposed.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant Neptale Givera based on the evidence presented and in rejecting his defense of alibi.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, modifying the penalty to reclusion perpetua for each murder due to lack of the necessary votes for the death penalty. The Court upheld the trial court’s findings, giving great weight to the factual conclusions of the judge who observed the witnesses’ demeanor. Prosecution witnesses positively identified Givera as part of Mayor So’s armed group traveling to Bulan and standing guard during the killings. This collective testimony directly placed him at the crime scene, participating in the coordinated operation.
The Court rejected Givera’s alibi as weak and unsubstantiated. His claim of serving a subpoena was undermined by inconsistencies, such as the lack of a receipt for the alleged service on the critical date and the absence of a vital motion in the case records that would have corroborated his story. The alibi could not overcome the positive identification by multiple witnesses. Furthermore, the Court found conspiracy among all accused. Their coordinated actions—some directly perpetrating the killings while others, including Givera, stood guard to prevent resistance—demonstrated a unity of purpose and community of design to commit the crimes. In conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all, rendering Givera equally liable for the murders and frustrated murder.