People v. Calicdan
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On September 19, 1982, at approximately 3:00 P.M., the victim, Reynaldo Cose, and his wife, Irene, were resting near their house. Two men, identified as accused-appellant Robert Calicdan and Fernan, approached them. Irene recognized Calicdan, whom she knew as Roberto Collado, and Fernan, who had previously visited their house. Fernan drew a gun, fired at the victim who was attempting to flee, but missed. The victim tried to wrest the gun from Fernan. During this struggle, Calicdan drew his pistol, shot the victim, causing him to fall. Calicdan then ordered Fernan to shoot the victim again, which Fernan did multiple times. The victim's son, Joselito Cose, testified that he heard gunshots, saw his father on the ground with Calicdan and Fernan standing over him, and was threatened with a carbine when he tried to approach. He also saw Fernan shoot his father in the face. Both Irene and Joselito reported the incident to the army barracks. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court, Branch XXXIX of Pangasinan, convicted accused-appellant Robert Calicdan y Lazo of Murder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. The other accused, Fernan, remained at large. The Petition: Accused-appellant interposed an appeal, assigning as errors the trial court's giving weight to prosecution testimonies and disregarding the defense, and finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt despite contrary evidence.
Issue(s)
Whether the trial court erred in giving weight and credence to the testimonies of prosecution witnesses and disregarding the defense theory, including the defense of alibi, the possibility of the accused being present at the crime scene, the delay in executing sworn statements, and the commission of the crime in broad daylight. Whether the trial court erred in finding the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged despite evidence to the contrary, and whether the penalty imposed was appropriate.
Ruling
The judgment of the trial court is affirmed, except as to the penalty which is modified to an indeterminate sentence of twelve (12) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to eighteen (18) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. Costs are against the accused-appellant.
Ratio Decidendi
On the credibility of witnesses, the defense of alibi, the possibility of accused-appellant being present at the crime scene, the delay in executing sworn statements, and the commission of the crime in broad daylight: The Court held that the defense of alibi is the weakest of all defenses and cannot prevail over positive identification. Accused-appellant was positively identified by Irene and Joselito Cose, who knew him personally and had no apparent motive to falsely accuse him. The trial court did not disregard the defense theory but weighed it against the prosecution's version and found the latter more credible. The Court found no sufficient reason to doubt or disbelieve the prosecution's account of the incident. The Court noted that the accused-appellant's residence in Lupao, Nueva Ecija, is adjacent to Umingan, Pangasinan, where the crime occurred, with travel time of only fifteen to twenty minutes by vehicle. This proximity, coupled with the availability of transportation, made it possible for the accused-appellant to have been present at the crime scene. The Court also found the defense's assertion that the accused-appellant never left his place of work and confined himself to his quarters with iron grills contrary to ordinary human experience, suggesting it would turn a workplace into a prison cell. The Court found it understandable that Irene and Joselito Cose took a week to execute their sworn statements, as they had to attend to the burial of their kin. It was also noted that they immediately reported the incident to the proper authorities after the shooting. The Court stated that the fact that the killing occurred in broad daylight does not render its commission impossible. The prosecution witnesses testified that they saw the accused in the company of armed men known to be NPAs, who are known to choose any time of day for liquidating suspected informers. On the finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt and the modification of the penalty: The Court affirmed the conviction for Murder and the imposition of reclusion perpetua by the trial court. However, it modified the penalty in accordance with Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by the 1987 Constitution, which abolished capital punishment. The imposable penalty for Murder is now reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua. In the absence of modifying circumstances, the penalty is imposed in its medium period. For purposes of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court determined the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed.
Main Doctrine
The defense of alibi, being the weakest of all defenses, cannot prevail over positive identification of the perpetrator by credible witnesses. The findings of a trial court on the credibility of witnesses are entitled to great weight and respect and will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of exceptions.