Case Summary (G.R. No. 108773)
Applicable Law
This case is governed by the provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution and relevant laws on murder and evidentiary standards, particularly regarding the evaluation of witness credibility and corroboration.
Factual Background
The prosecution's case established that on the early morning of September 14, 1983, witnesses Valeriana Rivera and others were returning from a local fiesta when they heard cries for help. They witnessed the three accused attacking Bacarro with stones, during which he pleaded for mercy. Despite his pleas, the attacks continued, leading to Bacarro's immediate death due to severe trauma.
Testimony and Credibility
The defense contended that the testimony of Valeriana Rivera was inconsistent and lacked corroboration. Accused-appellant Julian Jimenez argued that discrepancies in Rivera's account undermined her reliability, particularly regarding the lighting conditions at the crime scene and the sequence of events. However, the court found no substantial contradictions that would affect her credibility. The minor inconsistencies noted were disregarded, as they did not negate her overall assertion that the accused were responsible for the murder.
Issues Raised on Appeal
Julian Jimenez presented several points of error on appeal, primarily challenging the trial court's reliance on Rivera's testimony and the rejection of his alibi. He claimed that the prosecution's case was based solely on her account, which he argued was unsupported and biased. The court refuted these claims, stating that credible testimonies from a single witness can suffice for conviction, provided they are clear and convincing.
Defense of Alibi
The accused's defense of alibi, claiming he was fishing at the time of the murder, was deemed insufficient. The court reiterated the principle that alibi is a weak defense, particularly when countered by positive identification from eyewitnesses. The court emphasized that the credibility of the witness in identifying the assailant was paramount.
Affirmation of Conviction
Ultimately, the court upheld the trial court’s decision, affirming Julian Jimenez's conviction for murder. It ruled that the findings of fact were supported by the evidence presented and that the assessment of witness credibility was sound, as the
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 108773)
Case Background
- The case involves the charges of murder against accused Jesus Jimenez, German Jimenez, and Julian Jimenez.
- The Information details the incident occurring on September 14, 1983, at approximately 2:00 AM in Barangay Lanas, Municipality of Naga, Province of Cebu.
- The accused are alleged to have conspired to kill Eustaquio Bacarro using stones, resulting in Bacarro's instant death due to "Cardio Respiratory Arrest Secondary to Intracranial Hemorrhage Severe, with Skull Fracture Traumatic."
- The prosecution invoked the qualifying circumstance of alevosia and the aggravating circumstance of known premeditation and night time.
Trial and Decision
- Julian Jimenez was not apprehended initially, leading to a trial against Jesus and German Jimenez.
- The trial court found both guilty on November 25, 1985, and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua; they accepted the verdict without appeal.
- Julian Jimenez was arrested on March 12, 1990, leading to a separate trial, where he was also found guilty on September 4, 1992, and sentenced to reclusion perpetua, ordered to indemnify the heirs of the victim P10,000.00.
Appellant's Contentions
- The appellant, Julian Jimenez, raised several alleged errors for appeal: