G.R. No. 144222-24 - People vs. Boller

The case involves three accused-appellants – Ronito Boller (alias Obat), Dianito Boller (alias Nonoy), and Francisco Boller (alias Bayani) – charged with three counts of murder.
The charges stem from three similarly worded informations filed on December 22, 1995, alleging that on October 27, 1995, at approximately 8:00 a.m., the accused, conspiring together, committed the crime in Barangay Hinayagan, Municipality of Gandara, Samar.
The accused were charged for the killings of Lolito de la Cruz, Jesus Orquin, and Arsenio Orquin.

On the morning of October 27, 1995, while the Orquin family members were working at their copra kiln, they heard dogs barking.
Jacinto Orquin went outside and observed the accused-appellants about three meters away, each armed with different firearms (M-14 rifle, M-1 rifle, and shotgun), pointed at the copra kiln.
The accused opened fire on the copra kiln where Arsenio Orquin, Jesus Orquin, and Lolito de la Cruz were present.
Amid the chaos, Jacinto attempted to rescue his brother Jesus from the scene, noting the confusion and urgency of events.
Additional witnesses, including Roberto Tolin and Nixon de la Cruz, reported the incident promptly to the barangay authorities, contributing to the gathering of preliminary evidence.

Lolito de la Cruz, before succumbing to his wounds, made a dying declaration identifying the accused-appellants as his assailants.

The declaration included details of the incident, the appearance of the accused, and the specific location near a coconut plantation.
Although the statement was recorded in writing by a barangay tanod (Pedro Sumagdon) without the victim’s signature, its substance was later affirmed in court.

Testimony of Jacinto Orquin confirmed the presence and actions of the accused during the incident.
Roberto Tolin and other eyewitnesses assisted in identifying the scene and provided statements corroborating the dying declaration.
Autopsy reports conducted on the victims (Lolito, Jesus, and Arsenio Orquin) were consistent with fatal gunshot wounds, with detailed anatomical findings establishing cause of death.

Physical evidence at the scene included several empty shells found near the copra kiln.
Autopsy reports by Dr. Cresilda Teston-Aguilar detailed:

For Lolito de la Cruz – an avulsed gunshot wound with extensive damage, resulting in irreversible shock.
For Jesus Orquin – severe wounds at the lower end of the left thigh, transecting the femoral vessels.
For Arsenio Orquin – two distinct gunshot wounds involving key arteries and veins.

The recorded evidence from the dying declaration and autopsy collectively affirmed the fatal nature of the assault and supported the identification of the accused.

Testimonies asserting alibis – Ronito’s claim of being fetched to work on a farm by Luz Villocero, and Dianito’s assertion of being on duty at a military camp.
Francisco Boller’s testimony regarding his whereabouts, having been hired to repair a roof.

The defense additionally challenged the admissibility of Lolito de la Cruz’s dying declaration on technical grounds, questioning the manner of its recording.
Despite their alibi defenses, positive identifications by victims and corroborative eyewitness testimonies undermined the defense’s claims.
The trial court, drawing from the presented evidence, rendered a decision on May 16, 2000, convicting the accused of murder by initially imposing reclusion perpetua for each count and ordering indemnity payments.

The accused-appellants appealed the RTC decision, raising three primary assignments of error:

The lower court’s adoption of the dying declaration as valid evidence, despite alleged formal deficiencies.
The improper appraisal of treachery as a qualifying circumstance for murder.
The conviction for murder notwithstanding claims that guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Ultimately, the appellate court reviewed the evidence and arguments before making its final determination on the admissibility of evidence and the appropriate qualifying circumstances to impose penalties.

Whether Lolito de la Cruz’s dying declaration should be admitted despite concerns that it did not comply with formal authentication requirements.
Whether the recording of the dying declaration by a barangay official, using his own words, compromised its reliability.

Whether the prosecution proved, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the accused-appellants committed the killing with treachery.
Whether the circumstances of the killing justified the imputation of treachery as an aggravating factor.

Whether the accused-appellants successfully demonstrated, through their alibi testimonies, a physical impossibility of their presence at the crime scene.
Whether the defenses raised by the accused regarding their whereabouts could mitigate the evidence of their involvement.

Whether the actions of the accused-appellants, when taken together, demonstrated a common purpose and design, thereby rendering each equally culpable under the conspiracy doctrine.
The issue of imputation of the act of one as the act of all in establishing guilt for homicide.