CASE TITLE: PEOPLE V.
LARRANAGA
G.R No.: 138874-75 | DATE: July 21 2005 | PONENTE: *Per Curiam*
TOPIC: Rules on Admissibility: Real/Object and Demonstrative Evidence
DOCTRINE/S: Physical evidence is one of the highest degrees of proof.
It speaks more eloquently than all witnesses put together.
The totality of the evidence presented by both the prosecution and the
defense are weighed, thus, averting general conclusions from isolated
pieces of evidence.
FACTS:
 This is a Resolution to the MR filed by herein respondents
in a case which convicted and sentenced them to
imprisonment
o Herein respondents Francisco Juan Larranaga, Josman
Aznar, Rowen Adlawan, Alberto Cano and Ariel
Balansag, James Athony and James Andrew Uy were
convicted for the kidnapping, serious illegal detention,
and homicid of the Chiong sisters
 Grounds for their MR (relevant to the subject)
o Larranaga: Court a quo erred in barring Larranga and
the NBI Director from testifying
 Larranaga sufficiently proved his alibi
 Trial court prevented the introduction of key
defense
 Corpse found in the ravine was not that of
Marijoy
 Prosecution witness, Rustia, was a coached
witness
o In his supplemental MR, Larranaga submitted a
separate study of Dr. Raquel Del Rosario-Fortun to
show that the examination conducted by the
prosecution expert witnesses on the body found in Tan-
awan Carcar is inadequate
o In a similar supplemental MR, Aznar submitted his
Affidavit to show that:
 the police investigation of this case was awed;
 he was arrested in 1997 not because of his
involvement in this case but because he had in
his possession a pack of shabu and firearms;
and
 David Rusia is not a credible witness
ISSUE/S: WoN credence should be given to the testimony of Rustia – YES
 WoN Larranaga’s alibi should have been admitted by the trial
court - NO
HELD:
 Physical evidence is one of the highest degrees of proof. It
speaks more eloquently than all witnesses put together.
o The presence of Marijoy's ravished body in a deep
ravine at Tanawan, Carcar with tape on her mouth and
handcuffs on her wrists certainly bolstered Rusia's
testimony on what actually took place from Ayala
Center to Tan-awan
o What makes Rusia’s testimony worthy of belief is its
striking compatibility with the physical evidence
o The details he supplied of the trial court are of such
nature and quality that only a witness who actually saw
the commission of the crimes could furnish
o His testimony was corroborated by several other
witnesses who saw incidents of what he narrated
 Rolando Dacillo and Mario Minoza
witnessed Jacqueline's two failed attempts to
escape from appellants near Ayala Center.
 Benjamin Molina and Miguel Vergara
recognized Rowen as the person who inquired
from them where he could find a vehicle for
hire on the evening of July 16, 1997.
 Alfredo Duarte saw Rowen when he bought
barbeque and Tanduay at Nene's Store while
the white van, driven by Caño, was waiting on
the side of the road and he heard voices of
"quarreling male and female" emanating from
the van.
  Manuel Camingao and Rosendo Rio testified
on the presence of Larrañaga and Josman at
Tan-awan, Carcar at dawn of July 17, 1997.
o Even assuming that his testimony standing alone might
indeed be unworthy of belief in view of his character, it
is not so when considered with the other evidence
presented by the prosecution
 Settled is the rule that the defense of alibi is inherently
weak and crumbles in the light of positive declarations of
truthful witnesses who testified on affirmative matters.
o Evidence that is negative in nature and self-serving
cannot attain more credibility than the testimonies of
prosecution witnesses who testify on clear and positive
evidence
o alibi becomes less plausible as a defense when it is
corroborated only by relatives or close friends of the
accused
o Appellants failed to meet the requirement of alibi: time
and place
 failed to establish by clear and convincing
evidence that it was physically impossible for
them to be at the Ayala Center, Cebu City when
the Chiong sisters were abducted.
 clear from the evidence is that Rowen, Josman,
Ariel, Alberto, James Anthony and James
Andrew were all within the vicinity of Cebu
City on July 16, 1997
o Larrañaga's presence in Cebu City on July 16, 1997 was
proved to be not only a possibility but a reality
 During the hearing, it was shown that it takes
only one (1) hour to travel by plane from
Manila to Cebu and that there are four (4)
airline companies plying the route.
 One of the defense witnesses admitted that
there are several flights from Manila to Cebu
each morning, afternoon and evening.
 Larranaga was indeed at Cebu at the time of the commission
of the crimes and was one of the principal perpetrators
thereof
o 4 witnesses identified Larrañaga as one of the two men
talking to Marijoy and Jacqueline on the night of July 16,
1997.
 Shiela Singson: that on July 16, 1997, at
around 7:20 in the evening, she saw Larrañaga
approach Marijoy and Jacqueline at the West
Entry of Ayala Center. The incident reminded
her of Jacqueline's prior story that he was
Marijoy's admirer.
 confirmed that she knows Larrañaga since she
had seen him on 5 occasions.
 Analie Konahap: that on the same evening of
 July 16, 1997, at about 8:00 o'clock, she saw
Marijoy and Jacqueline talking to 2 men at the
West Entry of Ayala Center. She recognized
them as Larrañaga and Josman, having seen
them several times at Glicos, a game zone,
located across her office at the third level of
Ayala Center.
 Williard Redobles, the security guard then
assigned at Ayala Center, corroborated the
foregoing testimonies of Shiela and Analie.
 Rosendo Rio, a businessman from Cogon,
Carcar, declared that he saw Larrañaga at Tan-
awan at about 3:30 in the morning of July 17,
1997.
 The latter was leaning against the hood of a
white van. 15
 And over and above all, Rusia categorically
identified Larrañaga as one of the participes
criminis
 Atty. Villarin’s, NBI Director, Affidavit, was properly
excluded
o not a finger-print expert but an archaeologist
o his report consists merely of the results of his visual
inspection of the exhibits already several months old
o belated Affidavit which Aznar submitted only upon
submission of his supplemental MR
  Dr. Fortun’s separate study cannot be classified as newly-
discovered evidence warranting belated reception
o Larranaga could have produced it at the trial had he
wished to
 The argument that the body found in the Ravine was not
that of Marijoy’s cannot be assented to
o Inspector Edgardo Lenizo, a fingerprint expert, testified
that the fingerprints of the corpse match those of
Marijoy
o packaging tape and the handcuff found on the dead
body were the same items placed on Marijoy and
Jacqueline while they were being detained
o the body had the same clothes worn by Marijoy on the
day she was abducted.
o the members of the Chiong family personally identified
the corpse to be that of Marijoy 22 which they
eventually buried.
o They erected commemorative markers at the ravine,
cemetery and every place which mattered to Marijoy
o appellants still fail to bring to the attention of this Court
any person laying a claim on the said body.
o Surely, if the body was not that of Marijoy, other
families who had lost someone of similar age and
gender as Marijoy would have surfaced and claimed the
body

DISPOSITIVE: WHEREFORE, the motions for reconsideration fled by

appellants Francisco Juan Larrañaga, Josman Aznar, Rowen
Adlawan, Alberto Caño and Ariel Balansag are hereby DENIED. The
Solicitor General is DIRECTED (a) to secure from the Local Civil
Registrar of Cotobato City, as well as the National Statistics Office, a
clear and legible copy of James Andrew's Birth Certificate, and (b)
within ten (10) days therefrom, to file an extensive comment on the
motion for reconsideration filed by James Andrew and James
Anthony Uy, solely on James Andrews' claim of minority. The
motion is likewise DENIED insofar as James Anthony Uy is
concerned.