Title
People vs. Cerbito
Case
G.R. No. 126397
Decision Date
Feb 1, 2000
Armed men robbed a bus, killing a policeman; accused claimed alibi but were convicted of highway robbery and homicide based on witness testimony.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 235016)

Charges and Details

On September 24, 1992, an information was filed against the accused for violating Presidential Decree No. 532, known as the Anti-Highway Robbery Act. The complaint detailed how the accused, armed with firearms and bladed weapons, conspired to rob approximately P20,000 worth of money and personal belongings from the passengers. Subsequently, on March 26, 1993, a second information for homicide was filed alleging that the accused caused the death of Patrolman Ponce during the robbery.

Prosecution's Case

The prosecution presented evidence including testimonies from two passengers, Concordia Ramilo Pagdanganan and Amor Magsakay. Pagdanganan testified that the accused announced the hold-up, during which Ponce was shot, and detailed the events leading to the policeman's death and the robbery. Magsakay corroborated her testimony, providing further identification of the accused and detailing the robbery and subsequent shooting.

Defense and Alibi

The accused denied involvement in the crimes, asserting alibis claiming they were in Northern Samar during the incident or elsewhere in Metro Manila. Daniel Cerbito claimed he attended a fiesta in Northern Samar, supported by various witnesses. Acedera asserted he was at his brother's home, while Morales provided a similar account of being in his hometown. Despite their claims, the trial court found the evidence insufficient to refute the prosecution’s case.

Trial Court's Verdict

The trial court consolidated the two cases for joint trial and ultimately found the accused guilty of both robbery with homicide, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua and imposing civil liabilities for the death of Patrolman Ponce and damages to the passengers. They were ordered to pay a total of P1,055,000 to the heirs of the victim and P40,000 to Magsakay.

Appeal and Arguments

The accused-appellants appealed on the grounds that the trial court erred in convicting them due to the alleged reasonable doubt surrounding their presence at the scene. The Public Attorney’s Office argued for their acquittal emphasizing the defense of alibi and claiming that it was impossible for the accused to be at the crime scene.

Court's Analysis

The court found that the defense of alibi did not prevail against the positive identifications made by the prosecution’s witnesses. The testimonies of Pagdanganan and Magsakay were deemed credible and detailed, with no

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.