G.R. Nos. 73762-63, February 27, 1987
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RES DELAVIN, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The accused-appellant, Res Delavin, was convicted by the Regional Trial Court of Masbate for the murder of Ricardo Rojas and the attempted murder of Romana Rojas. The prosecution’s case rested primarily on the testimonies of two eyewitnesses: Deolinda Rojas, the daughter-in-law, and Romana Rojas, the widow. They testified that in the early morning of December 12, 1981, Delavin suddenly entered their store, shouted threats, and attempted to shoot Romana multiple times, but the gun failed to fire. When Ricardo appeared, Delavin shot and killed him instantly. Both witnesses positively identified Delavin, whom they had known for seven years, under the illumination of store lamps. Their accounts were partially corroborated by Artemio Deocariza, Jr., who heard the gunshot and later saw Delavin with a gun.
The defense presented denial and alibi. Delavin claimed he heard a gunshot and screams from the Rojas store but, with unnatural indifference, did not investigate and instead proceeded to the pier to travel to Manila. He remained there even after learning he was a suspect. A defense witness, Aproniano Villamor, claimed the assailant was an unidentified stranger, but the trial court found his testimony incredible due to his failure to report this alleged sighting to anyone.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution evidence is sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused-appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility, emphasizing that the judge had the direct opportunity to observe the witnesses’ demeanor. The minor inconsistencies in the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies were deemed to strengthen, not weaken, their veracity, as they are natural in honest recollection. The Court found the accused’s defense of denial inherently improbable; his claimed lack of curiosity about nearby gunshots and screams was contrary to human experience, and his subsequent stay in Manila suggested flight. Positive identification by credible eyewitnesses rendered proof of motive unnecessary, though evidence of resentment over a refused loan was presented.
The Court agreed that treachery qualified the killing to murder and established the attempted murder. The attack was sudden and unexpected, rendering the victims unable to defend themselves. Delavin’s statement, “I will kill you,” as he aimed at Romana, clearly evidenced intent to kill. The Court also sustained the awarded civil indemnity and damages for loss of earning capacity, calculated based on the victim’s proven income. The defense argument that the accused would not commit the crime openly was rejected, with the Court noting the modern reality of brazen criminality. The decision of the trial court was affirmed in its entirety.