G.R. No. 188456 - Roque, Jr. vs. Commission on Elections

The assistant provincial prosecutor of Malolos, Bulacan, charged John Alvin Pondivida (alias aScarface) on 6 October 2005 with murder under an Information alleging that on or about 8 July 2005, in Obando, Bulacan, he, in concert with co-accused Reyes and Alvarico, committed the crime by attacking Gener Bondoc y Cudia with a firearm.
The charge alleged that the accused, armed and with intent to kill, employed premeditation, abuse of superior strength, and treachery in the commission of the crime.

At around 3:30 a.m. on 8 July 2005, witness Rodelyn Buenavista was awakened by incessant knocking and the sound of someone kicking the front door of her residence.
Rodelyn, in company with her common-law partner Gener Bondoc and his brother Jover Bondoc, encountered three men identified as George Reyes, John Alvin Pondivida, and Glen Alvarico—one of whom was in possession of an armalite rifle.
During the encounter:

The assailants inquired about the whereabouts of individuals (Udoy and Bagsik) related to the victim.
When informed that the persons sought were not present, one of the accused fired four shots.
Despite Rodelyn’s attempts to protect her sleeping children, the assailants deliberated near a well outside the house.

A conversation ensued at the door where Gener Bondoc was invited to come outside; he declined due to the apparent danger.
Pondivida and Alvarico subsequently entered the house via a second-floor window after climbing a guava tree.
Both Reyes and Alvarico fired at Gener, resulting in a fatal head wound.

Jover Bondoc’s testimony that he and his brother had an earlier altercation with a gasoline station employee, a friend of the assailants.
Post-incident, Pondivida fled to Olongapo City for five months before being apprehended upon his return to Obando.
Co-accused Alvarico and Reyes were never located and remain at large.

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Bulacan, in Criminal Case No. 2678-M-2005, found Pondivida guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder.
In addition to imposing reclusion perpetua, the RTC ordered the payment of:

The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s findings and verdict, clarifying that the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength was absorbed in the element of treachery.

The prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
There was insufficient evidence to establish a conspiracy among the accused.
The fact that witness Rodelyn Buenavista did not see the actual shooting created reasonable doubt regarding his guilt.

Both the accused and the Solicitor General indicated that their positions were fully detailed in their appellate briefs; no supplemental briefs were filed.
The Supreme Court, upon reviewing the case records, found no cogent reason to disturb the factual findings of the RTC or the affirmations of the CA.
Notably, the accused’s own admissions—including his presence at the scene, his act of knocking on the door, and confirming that both Reyes and Alvarico shot the victim—corroborated the chain of events as testified by witness Rodelyn, albeit indirectly.

Whether the prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt that Pondivida was guilty of murder despite the absence of direct eyewitness testimony of the actual shooting.
Whether the circumstantial evidence offered—especially that of witness Rodelyn Buenavista—was enough to satisfy the requirement of positive identification under the law.

Whether the prosecution sufficiently demonstrated that Pondivida conspired with co-accused Reyes and Alvarico in the commission of the crime.
Whether the collective actions and subsequent admissions by Pondivida could be imputed to a joint criminal design and common purpose among the co-accused, thus fulfilling the elements required to prove conspiracy.

Whether the trial court’s reliance on the circumstantial identification provided by Rodelyn Buenavista was justified, given that she did not witness the actual shooting.
Whether the witness’s testimony, when considered alongside the accused’s own admissions, eliminated any reasonable doubt regarding his participation in the execution of the crime.