MANILA, Philippines--The man who shot dead University of the Philippines journalism student Nino Calinao will remain behind bars after the Supreme Court affirmed his murder conviction.

The high tribunal, however, reduced the sentence handed down to Resurreccion Ranin Jr. from capital punishment to reclusion perpetua without the possibility of parole.

Calinao, 21, was shot dead on Feb. 19, 1999 at Palma Hall on the UP Diliman campus.

Ranin, along with Besmart Al-Baddar Lauppah, Rizal Sarri Lamsani and Ommar Hadjula, were later charged with the victim's murder.

Of the four, only Ranin was found guilty by the Quezon City Regional Trial Court. The rest were acquitted.

Ranin, who was seen walking around the UP campus with several companions before the incident, was found to have shot Calinao twice. As the student was crawling on the ground holding his abdomen, he was shot a third time. As he lay on the ground, he was shot a fourth time.

Lady guard Lina De Castro, who had stood as witness in the case, had to plead with Ranin and tug on his shirt to tell him to stop.

"Dodong, Dodong, tama na yan, patay na yang bata [Stop it, the child is dead]," the guard was quoted as saying.

After the Court of Appeals upheld the RTC's findings, Ranin elevated the issue to the high court.

In a June 25 decision penned by Justice Leonardo Quisumbing, the high court found sufficient evidence to convict Ranin for the state scholar's murder.

It found no merit in Ranin's arguments that the witness' statements were incredible and could not be used to pin him down, and that the judge who handed down the verdict was not the one who heard the evidence. Ranin also argued that the defect in his right hand made it impossible for him to have shot Calinao.

According to the high court, the inconsistencies in the witness De Castro's statement about the time intervals between each shot actually referred to "minor matters that did not touch on the commission of the crime itself as to affect the substance of her declaration, and the veracity or weight of her eyewitness testimony."

De Castro had tagged Ranin as the gunman, and had also said she saw him walking around Palma Hall.

The high court also said that even though it was shown that Ranin could not grasp a .45 cal. with his left hand, De Castro said the gunman had used his right hand to shoot Calinao.

It said that even though Ranin had difficulty bending his right forefinger, he could still have used the other fingers on his right hand to fire the gun.

"In fact, the result of the Nerve Conduction Studies, administered on appellant Ranin unqualifiedly indicated normal sensory conduction of his right radial nerve," it added.

Thus, the high court said, Ranin failed to debunk De Castro's testimony that he was the one who killed Calinao.

"It is well settled that positive identification, where categorical, consistent, and not attended by any showing of ill motive on the part of the eyewitness testifying on the matter, prevails over alibi and denial which, if not substantiated by clear and convincing evidence, are negative and self-serving evidence undeserving weight in law. In the same vein, appellant Ranin's alibi that he had never been to UP fails in the face of positive identification by De Castro," it said.

The high court also said that even though the judge who heard the testimonies of witnesses was not the one who penned the decision finding Ranin guilty of murder, this does not mean the decision should be overturned.

It said that a judge could rely on transcripts, and that such a move does not violate a person's right to due process.

"Though ideally a judge should hear all the testimonies personally, at times the reality is that a different judge might pen the decision because the predecessor judge has retired or died or has resigned. In this situation, it cannot be assumed that the findings of fact of the judge who took over the case are not reliable and do not deserve the respect of the appellate courts," it said.