People v. Regal
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On August 31, 1958, Pio Abuyen and his wife Irene Abriol were returning home by ferryboat. Upon disembarking and walking, Pio Abuyen was shot. He recognized his assailant as Custodio Regal and exclaimed, "Odio (referring to Custodio Regal), if you did not hit me only by surprise." Irene Abriol also saw Custodio and Dionisio Regal behind a guava tree, with Custodio aiming the gun at Pio Abuyen, who died on the spot. The autopsy revealed that death was caused by hemorrhage due to gunshot wounds on vital organs, specifically the ventricle of the heart. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance of Samar found Custodio Regal and Dionisio Regal guilty of murder, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua and ordering them to indemnify the victim's heirs. They were credited with preventive imprisonment. The Petition: The accused appealed the decision, primarily raising the defense of alibi.
Issue(s)
Whether the defense of alibi presented by the appellants is sufficient to overcome the positive identification by the victim's wife. Whether Dionisio Regal is guilty as a co-principal in the murder of Pio Abuyen.
Ruling
The judgment of the Court of First Instance is affirmed with respect to Custodio Regal, who is ordered to pay the full amount of indemnity. The judgment is reversed with respect to appellant Dionisio Regal, who is acquitted.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of alibi versus positive identification: The Court held that the defense of alibi has no weight against positive identification of the culprit. In this case, the victim's wife, Irene Abriol, positively identified Custodio Regal as the assailant, stating she saw him aiming the gun at her and her husband after hearing the shot. While one witness testified that Irene did not recognize the assailants, this was rebutted by other police officers who stated Irene promptly identified the appellants. The Court found the alibi of the appellants unreliable, noting inconsistencies in the testimonies of their witnesses regarding their whereabouts and the timing of their departure. On the guilt of Dionisio Regal: The Court found no proof of conspiracy between Custodio Regal and his son, Dionisio Regal. While Dionisio was present at the scene of the killing, mere passive presence does not make an accused a co-principal. There was no evidence that Dionisio assisted his father or shared his father's sentiments against the victim. Therefore, Dionisio Regal was acquitted.
Main Doctrine
The defense of alibi has no weight against positive identification of the culprit by a credible witness. Mere passive presence at the scene of the crime does not make an accused a co-principal absent proof of conspiracy or participation.