A Case Brief ANTONIO LEJANO, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. G.R. No.

176389 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. HUBERT JEFFREY P. WEBB, ANTONIO LEJANO, MICHAEL A. GATCHALIAN, HOSPICIO FERNANDEZ, MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ, PETER ESTRADA and GERARDO BIONG, Appellants. G.R. No. 176864

FACTS: On June 30, 1991 Estrellita Vizconde and her daughters Carmela, nineteen years old, and Jennifer, seven, were brutally slain at their home in Paraaque City. Following an intense investigation, the police arrested a group of suspects, the Barrosso group, an Akyat Bahay gang, some of whom gave detailed confessions. But the trial court smelled a frame-up and eventually ordered them discharged. Four years later in 1995, the National Bureau of Investigation presented Jessica Alfaro as the state witness who described the crime and positively identified all the suspects who committed the crime. The defense however, questioned the credibility of Alfaro, being a drug dependent and being an NBI asset who is skilled to concoct information. Likewise, during the trial, Webbs alibi appeared the strongest since he claimed that he was then across the ocean in the United States of America. He presented the testimonies of witnesses as well as documentary and object evidence to prove this.

The trial court rendered judgment in 1994, finding all the accused guilty as charged. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial courts decision. The appellate court did not agree that the accused were tried by publicity or that the trial judge was biased. On motion for reconsideration by the accused, the Court of Appeals' Special Division of five members voted three against two to deny the motion,5 hence, the present appeal.

ISSUE: Whether or not Webbs defense of alibi and denial can rebut Alfaros testimony of positive identification that may lead to his acquittal.

HELD: Yes. The Supreme Court held that the defense of alibi of Webb rebuts the testimony of positive identification of Alfaro that leads to his acquittal.

REASONS FOR DECISION: The trial courts and the Court of Appeals reason that Webbs alibi cannot stand against Alfaros positive identification of him and that Webbs denial and alibi were fabricated was demolished by the Supreme Court. It ruled that not all denials and alibis should be regarded as the weakest defense as it could be easily fabricated and difficult to disprove. Indeed, if the accused is truly innocent, he can have no other defense but denial and alibi. The conclusion that a positive declaration from a witness that he saw the accused commit the crime should not automatically cancel out the accuseds claim that he did not do it. The elements to establish alibi that the accused must prove by positive, clear, and satisfactory evidence; that he was present at another place at the time of the perpetration of the crime; and that it was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime, were all regarded as facts and have evidentiary value that would support for the acquittal of the accused.