People v. Mercado
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On February 17, 1972, at approximately 7:30 PM, a robbery occurred in the house of Antonio Moron in La Paz, Leyte. During the robbery, Antonio Moron sustained gunshot wounds and died seven days later. The robbers allegedly stole cash and personal properties amounting to P1,286.00. Procedural History: Jovito Mercado, Gregorio Silvio, and Estanislao Dedase were charged with robbery in band with homicide. Jesus Mercado and Teofilo Quimzon were subsequently charged with the same offense in separate criminal cases. All accused pleaded not guilty. The Court of First Instance of Leyte convicted all the accused of the special complex offense of robbery with homicide, with two aggravating circumstances (band and dwelling), and sentenced them to death. They were also ordered to indemnify the heirs of the deceased. The Petition: The accused appealed the decision of the trial court, primarily raising the defense of alibi and questioning the appreciation of aggravating circumstances.
Issue(s)
Whether the defense of alibi can prevail over the positive identification by eyewitnesses. Whether the aggravating circumstances of 'band' and 'dwelling' were correctly appreciated by the trial court. Whether the penalty of death was correctly imposed.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the trial court, finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the special complex crime of robbery with homicide. The penalty of death was affirmed.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of alibi: The Court reiterated that alibi is a weak defense, especially when contradicted by positive identification by credible eyewitnesses. It emphasized that for alibi to be credible, it must not only show that the accused were elsewhere but also that it was physically impossible for them to be at the scene of the crime. In this case, the eyewitness testimonies of Remedios Moron and Matilde Elias positively identified all the accused as the perpetrators. The Court found no reason to doubt the credibility of these witnesses, noting that their testimonies were consistent and corroborated each other, and that any perceived inconsistencies were adequately explained. On the aggravating circumstances of 'band' and 'dwelling': The Court found that the aggravating circumstance of 'band' was present because the crime was committed by at least seven armed men who forced their way into the victim's house. Their intimidating presence prevented Antonio Moron from resisting the robbery, even though he was armed. Regarding the aggravating circumstance of 'dwelling,' the Court clarified that it is not the trespass but the commission of the crime within the dwelling that constitutes the aggravating circumstance, regardless of how the offender gained entrance. The evidence showed the crime was committed inside the victim's house. On the imposable penalty: Since the crime of robbery with homicide was attended by two aggravating circumstances ('band' and 'dwelling') and no mitigating circumstances, the Court held that the trial court correctly imposed the supreme penalty of death, in accordance with Article 63, second paragraph, subparagraph 1, in relation to Article 294(1) of the Revised Penal Code.
Main Doctrine
The defense of alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification of the accused by credible witnesses. For alibi to prosper, it must not only be shown that the accused were elsewhere but that it was physically impossible for them to have been at the scene of the crime. The aggravating circumstances of 'band' and 'dwelling' were correctly appreciated by the trial court.