Republic of the Philippines - Campaign

APPELLANTS’ BRIEF
People of the Philippines vs. Fortuna, et. al.
S. C. G. R. No. 141660-64
evidence regardless of the absence of coercion or even if it had
been voluntarily given. (175 SCRA 422, 432).
With no other evidence linking the accused to the crime except the questionable
in-court identification and inconsistent, albeit tainted, testimony of Freddie Alejo, there is
no strong basis for pinning culpability to these accused-appellants.
In such an instance, their defense of alibi gains credibility and should be looked
into by the court. This Court has, in a number of cases, given credence to alibi as
summed up and enumerated in People vs. Gregorio, (G.R. NO. L-35390, June 29, 1982):
Where the evidence of the prosecution is weak and betrays lack
of concreteness on the question on whether or not the defendant
is the author of the crime charged, alibi as a defense assumes
importance. (People vs. Bulawin, 29 SCRA 710).
Where the identification of the accused as the author of the crime
is unreliable, his defense of alibi assumes importance and may
be given credence. (People vs. Cunanan, 19 SCRA 769).
Although alibi is the weakest defense that an accused can avail
of, it acquired commensurate strength where no positive and
proper identification has been sarisfactorily made by witnesses
of the offender’s identity. (People vs. Baquiran, 20 SCRA 451)
Also, in another case, this Court ruled:
…where the evidence for the prosecution against the accused as
author of a crime charged is weak, doubtful, unconvincing,
unreliable or unsatisfactory, the defense of alibi assumes
importance and acquires commensurate strength, and therefore,
may be given credence. (People vs. Tabayoyong, et. al., G.R.
No. L-31084, May 29, 1981 citing People vs. Cunanan, et. al. 19
SCRA 769, 783; People vs. Bulawin, 29 SCRA 710, 721-722;
People vs. Cruz, 32 SCRA 451, 460-461; People vs. Basuel, 47
SCRA 207, 222-223; People vs. Beltran, 61 SCRA 246, 255-
256; People vs. Salas, et. al, 66 SCRA 126, 132-133; People vs.
Lim and Lim, 80 SCRA 496). Indeed, we must “emphasize the
fact that courts should not at once look with disfavor at the
defense of alibi… When an accused puts up the defense of alibi,
the court should not at once have a mental prejudice against him.
For, taken in the light of all the evidence on record, it may be
sufficient to acquit him. (People vs. Villacorte, et. al., 55 SCRA
640, 655).
Given the foregoing, we invoke the oft-repeated formulation that in criminal
prosecution, the prosecution must rely on the strength of its own evidence, and not on the
Page 104 of 127
104