G.R. No. L-41642-46 May 15, 1987
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff, vs. JULITO DAVA alias LILIT DAVA, ET AL., accused, JULITO DAVA alias LILIT DAVA, MANSUETO VILLAHERMOSA alias MANSUETO CASINO, CALIXTO VILLAHERMOSA alias CALIXTO CASINO, NONITO GALEDO (GALIDO) and HERMOSISIMO GALEDO (GALIDO), appellants.

FACTS

On the evening of October 4, 1968, eight armed men entered the residence of Antonio Ganaan in Barrio Bambang, Matalam, Cotabato. The intruders tied up the occupants, which included the Ganaan family and several house guests, and proceeded to hack and kill Antonio Ganaan, his wife Martina, his son Rogelio, and four guests: Felizardo, Juanito Afsay, Dacu, and Orbeto Nobliza. A guest, Danilo Peñon, was seriously injured but survived. The assailants ransacked the house, stealing valuables and personal properties. Separate informations for robbery with multiple homicide and frustrated homicide were filed against several accused, including appellants Julito Dava, Mansueto Villahermosa, Calixto Villahermosa, Nonito Galido, and Hermosisimo Galido.
After trial, the Court of First Instance found the appellants guilty as co-principals. The court imposed seven death penalties for the seven homicides and an indeterminate prison sentence for the frustrated homicide against Danilo Peñon. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic review. The appellants, through counsel de oficio, assigned errors, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that their defense of alibi was not properly considered, claiming the identification by witnesses was unreliable.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution evidence, particularly the eyewitness identification, was sufficient to convict the appellants beyond reasonable doubt, thereby rendering their defense of alibi unavailing.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court held that the prosecution successfully established the appellants’ guilt. Eyewitness Danilo Peñon, who was present during the entire ordeal, positively identified appellants Julito Dava and Nonito Galido. His testimony was deemed credible, detailed, and consistent, as he had ample opportunity to observe the perpetrators under the illumination of a petromax lamp inside the house. His identification was further corroborated by another witness, Rogelio Ganaan, who identified appellants Mansueto and Calixto Villahermosa from a police lineup.
The Court emphasized that for alibi to prosper, the accused must demonstrate not only their presence elsewhere at the time of the crime but also the physical impossibility of being at the crime scene. The appellants failed to meet this stringent requirement. Their alibis were weak, uncorroborated, and did not preclude their presence at the locus criminis. Positive identification by credible witnesses, as in this case, prevails over a mere denial and unsubstantiated alibi. Consequently, the finding of conspiracy among the appellants was sustained based on their collective and coordinated actions during the robbery and killings. The Court modified the penalty, reducing the seven death sentences to seven penalties of reclusion perpetua in accordance with the constitutional abolition of the death penalty, and increased the civil indemnity to the heirs of each victim to P30,000.00. The decision was affirmed in all other respects.