G.R. No. 47777 - Hashim vs. Boncan

The case is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Samar.
Appellant Andres Midoranda was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment with perpetual absolute disqualification.
The judgment also ordered the payment of indemnity (P2,000) to the heirs of the deceased, Diego Testor, and the payment of court costs.
The conviction resulted from the participation of Midoranda, along with others, in acts that led to the death of Diego Testor.

Sometime before March 11, 1944, the now-deceased Diego Testor was requested by a man named Ponting to deliver a quantity of fish to a constabulary detachment.
The detachment was located in the barrio of Trinidad, in the municipality of Calbayog, province of Samar.
The unit was commanded by Sergeant Dario Margen and comprised seven or eight men.
Needing food for his children, Testor traded the fish for camote, deviating from what was expected.

Upon discovering the deviation, Sgt. Margen summoned Testor to account for the breach of trust.
Testor arrived at the barracks with a quantity of another fish species, the kalapion, as a substitute.
Sgt. Margen, irritated by Testor’s conduct, seized the kalapion and hurled them at Testor’s face.
Testor’s hands were then tied behind his back, and he was subjected to a series of brutal blows.
Three soldiers, Julian Tarrayo, Domingo Ramos (now deceased), and Andres Midoranda, actively participated in beating Testor by hitting him on various parts of the body.
Sgt. Margen, aided by Tarrayo and Midoranda, forced the defenseless Testor to eat two of the kalapion whole, involving:

After enduring the ordeal, Testor was taken to Calbayog where, despite receiving medical attention, he died on March 12, 1944.
The post-mortem examination (autopsy) revealed:

The victim’s body showed various contusions.
Death was attributed to internal hemorrhage resulting from the perforation of his intestines by stiff fish bones.

Multiple eyewitnesses testified to the events leading to the deceased’s death.
Appellant Midoranda’s own witness, Eleuterio Anabeso, admitted on cross-examination that Midoranda was among those who slapped the face of the deceased.
The cumulative evidence clearly indicated Midoranda’s direct participation in the binding, beating, and inhuman treatment of Testor.

The defense argued that Midoranda should not be held liable for murder in the absence of proof of conspiracy.
It was contended that Midoranda merely obeyed orders from his superior, Sgt. Margen.
The argument emphasized that obedience to a superior’s orders might exempt a subordinate from criminal liability, but only when the order in question was for a lawful purpose.

The order given by Sgt. Margen to torture Diego Testor was inherently illegal.
The fact that the deceased had committed an offense did not justify taking the law into one’s own hands.
The order did not fall within the parameters of a lawful directive as mandated by the Revised Penal Code (Art. 11, par. 6).

Whether Andres Midoranda can be held as a co-principal in the commission of the murder of Diego Testor given his participation in the unlawful acts.
Whether his involvement, as evidenced by eyewitness testimony and his own witness’s admission, suffices for establishing criminal liability.

Whether Midoranda’s argument that he was merely obeying orders from his superior can serve as a valid exemption under the law.
Whether the order from Sgt. Margen, although given by a superior, loses its protective value because it was manifestly illegal and aimed at executing inhuman punishment.

Whether the lack of evidence regarding a conspiracy among the perpetrators should absolve Midoranda from criminal liability.
Whether common grievance and mutual participation in the commission of the crime can override the requirement for a formal conspiracy.