G.R. No. 209906 - Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. vs. Menez

Two informations were filed on October 25, 1994, against appellant Jesus Torio (alias "Tigno"):

Criminal Case No. L-5188 charged him with murder, alleging that on the evening of August 12, 1994, in Barangay Bolaoen, Bugallon, Pangasinan, he, armed with a long firearm and acting with treachery, shot Barangay Captain Ramon Paulo resulting in multiple fatal gunshot wounds.
Criminal Case No. L-5189 charged him with illegal possession of a firearm and ammunition in connection with the murder.

Appellant pleaded not guilty to both charges during arraignment on November 23, 1994, and trial ensued.

Detailed forensic evidence established that the victim sustained multiple entrance and exit wounds:

Several gunshot wounds affected the head, chest, skull, and various parts of the left side, causing comminuted fractures and severe damage to brain and internal organs.
The cause of death was determined to be the cumulative effect of these multiple shots.

Eyewitness testimonies and evidentiary photographs established the sequence of events:

John Paulo testified that while on a dike with another witness, Marlon Cagaoan, he saw the appellant shoot the victim from behind as the victim was riding on a motorcycle.
Marlon Cagaoan corroborated the account, noting the presence of the appellant in clear view due to the illumination from the motorcycle’s headlight.
Additional observations came from SPO1 Bernardo Cerezo, who described the crime scene and the presence of empty M-16 shells near the victim.

Separate testimony and physical evidence linked appellant to the possession of an unlicensed long firearm:

The information charged that appellant had the firearm used in the commission of the crime.
Appellant’s alleged possession was challenged later in view of subsequent amendments in law, although it remained part of the trial proceedings initially.

Amalia (Alma) Paulo, daughter of the victim, testified regarding the victim’s background and the financial impact on the victim’s heirs.
John Paulo and Marlon Cagaoan provided eyewitness identification despite the delay in their formal statements (ten and twelve days respectively), explaining the delay as due to fear and reluctance.
SPO1 Bernardo Cerezo, Orlando Concepcion, Daido Ferrer, and Dr. Ronaldo Bandonill further corroborated facts concerning the shooting, the physical evidence, and links between the injuries and the firearm used.

Four witnesses, including the accused himself, testified that he was present at a birthday party in the house of Carlos Jimenez in Barangay Balococ, Lingayen on the night of August 12, 1994.
Photographs taken during the party, which lasted from about 7:00 p.m. to 11:45 p.m. (with one testimony extending his presence until midnight), were offered to support the alibi.

It was physically impossible for the appellant to leave the party and reach the crime scene in time.
The evidence presented by the prosecution was insufficient to convict beyond reasonable doubt.

The trial court rendered a judgment convicting appellant for murder under Criminal Case No. L-5188 and for illegal possession of firearm and ammunition under Criminal Case No. L-5189.
The court also ordered the appellant to pay various amounts to the victim’s heirs covering actual damages, death indemnity, loss of earning capacity, moral, and exemplary damages.
Appellant raised two major errors on appeal:

That the trial court improperly weighed the prosecution’s eyewitness testimonies over the alibi evidence.
That the evidence was insufficient to convict him beyond a reasonable doubt.

Whether the trial court erred in giving full weight and credence to the eyewitness testimonies despite the delay in their identification of the appellant.

The delay in identification by John Paulo and Marlon Cagaoan was argued to affect their credibility.

Whether the testimony of witnesses present at the scene, including the positive identification of the appellant, sufficiently establishes his presence and participation in the crime.
Whether the defense’s alibi, supported by the birthday party testimony and photographs, was adequately disproved by the evidence showing the proximity of the event to the crime scene.
Whether the prosecution was able to overcome the defense’s contention regarding the insufficiency of evidence in proving the murder beyond a reasonable doubt.
Whether the separate charge of illegal possession of firearm and ammunition was properly sustained given subsequent legal amendments and the evidence presented.
Whether the awarding and computation of civil damages (actual, death indemnity, loss of earning capacity, moral, and exemplary damages) were properly assessed.