People v.
Nueva o Denial: Did not know of any untoward or stabbing incident in his
Positive and Negative Evidence | November 3, 2008 | J. Brion
Nature of Case: Review
Digest maker: Pauleanne Carmeli Pangan
Petitioner: People of the Philippines
Respondent: Dante Nueva y Samaro
For: Murder
SUMMARY: Dante Nueva, along with two others (Porpirio Maribuhok and John Doe) are
accused of the murder of Revollido -- for allegedly boxing and stabbing him. Prosecution
presented an eye-witnesses, who was able to witness the crime from 7 to 8 arms length and
was able to categorically identify Dante Nueva as one of the men who stabbed the victim.
Nueva raised the defenses: alibi and denial. The Court held that the positive identification
made by the prosecution’s witness prevails over Nueva’s alibi and affirmed the conviction
of Nueva.
DOCTRINE: Positive identification, made categorically and consistently, almost always
prevails over alibi and denial. Such defenses if not substantiated by clear and convincing
evidence, are negative and self-serving, hence undeserving of weight in law.
FACTS:
● December 29, 2000, at around 1PM: Porpirio Maribuhok, Dante Nueva and a
John Doe allegedly boxed and killed Virgilio Revollido, Jr.
o Herein accused Dante Nueva was the only one apprehended
● Eye-witness Alfonso Bacar, Jr.’s testimony stated that:
o He was standing outside Great Taste Bakery (4th Avenue East,
Caloocan) at around 10 PM of Dec 29, 2000
▪ He was more or less 7 to 8 arms length away from the place
of the incident which was well-lighted
o Saw the victim running from Marcelo H. Del Pilar Street → being
chased by John Doe
o Upon reaching 4th Avenue, the victim passed in front of Nueva and
Maribuhok. Nueva grabbed the victim’s left hand and pulled him to
the other side of the road where Maribuhok hit the victim using a
piece of wood → Victim fell to his knees; Nueva didn’t stop boxing
him and then John Doe stabbed victim on the back → Nueva also
stabbed the victim’s chest
▪ HE WAS ABLE TO CATEGORICALLY PINPOINT
NUEVA AS ONE OF THE STABBERS
o Nueva then ran towards MH Del Pilar Street and an identified person over alibi and denial. Such defenses if not substantiated by clear and convincing
brought the victim to the hospital
● Accused Nueva’s defense:
o Raised an alibi that he was not in the area, but at his work at Yellow
Submarine as a bouncer → alleged he was there around 10:00PM to
3:00AM
working place; doesn’t know why he’s being charged with murder;
said he didn’t see co-accused Maribuhok at the time of the incident
● RTC: guilty beyond reasonable doubt; CA: affirmed
ISSUE/S & RATIO:
1. W/N the evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient
a. YES. The evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient.
b. The Court found no reason to disturb the findings of the trial court as
regards the credibility of Bacar, holding that the same is a matter best
left to the determination of the trial court for it had the unique
advantage of personally observing the witnesses, their demeanor,
conduct, and attitude. Such assessment is binding upon appellate
courts unless the lower court had patently overlooked facts and
circumstance of weight and influence that could alter the results of
the case.
c. Further, there is no showing that Bacar had any reason to perjure
himself, thus there is no improper motive and that his testimony is
worthy of full faith and credit. In addition, there is no doubt as to the
positive identification of Nueva as Bacar has known him for roughly
4 years.
2. W/N Nueva’s defenses of denial and evidence hold credence over the
positive identification of the eye-witness1
a. NO. Nueva’s defenses were weak and insufficient.
b. To be believed, denial must be supported by strong evidence of non-
culpability; otherwise, it is purely self-serving.
c. Alibi,2 on the other hand, is one of the weakest defenses in a criminal
case and should be rejected when the identity of the accused is
sufficiently and positively established by the prosecution.
i. PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE TO BE IN GREAT TASTE
BAKERY FROM YELLOW SUBMARINE! -- Only short
distance
d. In addition, said alibi cannot prevail over Bacar's positive
identification.
i. Court said that: To the point of being repetitive, we restate what
Alfonso, the principal witness, positively narrated in court: the
appellant held the hand of the victim and led him towards the
other side of the road; Porpirio hit the victim on the head with a
1 Positive identification, made categorically and consistently, almost always prevails
evidence, are negative and self-serving, hence undeserving of weight in law.
2 For the appellant’s defense of alibi to prosper, he should have proven that it was
physically impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime when it was
committed. By physical impossibility we refer to the distance and the facility of access
between the situs criminis and the place where he says he was when the crime was
committed.
piece of wood causing the latter to fall to his knees; the appellant
boxed the victim until John Doe came and stabbed him at the back;
then the appellant, who was at the victims front, stabbed him in
the chest.