G.R. Nos. L-55103-04 August 18, 1988
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CESAR LEGASPI and TEOFILO BOSQUE y NUNEZ, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

Accused Cesar Legaspi and Teofilo Bosque, along with two others, were charged with Frustrated Robbery in Band with Homicide and Frustrated Homicide. The prosecution established that on May 7, 1972, in Sta. Maria, Bulacan, the accused, armed and using a jeep, followed spouses Apolonio and Irene Gallardo as they traveled home from their gas station. In an uninhabited area, the jeep overtook and blocked the victims’ tricycle. The assailants announced a hold-up and fired shots, killing Apolonio and wounding Irene. The accused were positively identified by Irene Gallardo, who witnessed the event under the illumination of the tricycle’s headlight. After trial, the Circuit Criminal Court convicted Legaspi and Bosque of the complex crime of Attempted Robbery with Homicide and Frustrated Homicide.
The accused appealed, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court. The appellants subsequently filed a motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence, consisting of affidavits from three individuals aimed at impeaching the credibility of prosecution witnesses and corroborating Legaspi’s alibi.

ISSUE

Whether the motion for new trial based on allegedly newly discovered evidence should be granted.

RULING

The Supreme Court denied the motion for new trial and affirmed the conviction with modification on the civil indemnity. The Court held that the proffered evidence did not qualify as newly discovered evidence under the law. For evidence to warrant a new trial, it must be such that it could not have been discovered and produced during the trial despite the exercise of due diligence. The affidavits presented could have been discovered earlier with reasonable effort. Furthermore, the evidence was merely impeaching in character, intended to discredit the testimony of prosecution witnesses, and served to corroborate the accused’s alibi. Jurisprudence consistently holds that evidence which only seeks to impeach a witness or corroborate the defense does not constitute a valid ground for a new trial, especially where the conviction rests on strong and credible evidence, such as the positive identification by the victim Irene Gallardo. The Court also sustained the penalty of reclusion perpetua imposed by the Court of Appeals, noting the presence of three aggravating circumstances (nocturnity, uninhabited place, use of motor vehicle) offset by the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender in Legaspi’s case. The civil indemnity for the death of Apolonio Gallardo was increased to P30,000.00.