G.R. No. 1731 : February 13, 1905
THE UNITED STATES, complainant-appellee, vs. DANIEL MARINAY, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS:
In a complaint dated November 24, 1903, the defendants were charged with the crime of bandolerismo. It was alleged that from November 12, 1902, to November 15, 1903, they conspired and formed an armed band of brigands in the Provinces of Albay, Ambos Camarines, and Sorsogon. The band’s object was to steal carabaos and other personal property by means of force and violence. After trial, the court sentenced Daniel Marinay, Hermenegildo Repoberbio, and Juan Pitonjera to death. The other defendants received various prison sentences and did not appeal. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court en consulta for review of the death penalties.

The evidence established that a large, militarily organized band operated under the command of Simeon Ola. While claiming a political purpose, its actual activities consisted of robbery, abduction, rape, and murder. Specific proven acts included: an attack on the Constabulary cuartel in Oas (killing a policeman and seizing firearms); a raid on the municipal building of Bato; and the abduction and rape of women in Buraburahan. Regarding the three appellants: Daniel Marinay, as a chief, ordered the killing of Silvino Padre and Lorenzo Cervantes, robbed a Chinese store, and held Cervantes’s wife captive. Hermenegildo Repoberbio, a lieutenant, ordered the killings of Jacobo Cabansal and Hilario and Vicente Quadra. Juan Pitonjera ordered the killing of Telesforo Alevanto.

ISSUE:
Whether the guilt of defendants Daniel Marinay, Hermenegildo Repoberbio, and Juan Pitonjera for the crime of bandolerismo, as defined and punished under Act No. 518, has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the lower court, imposing the death penalty on the three appellants.

The Court found the evidence clear and convincing that a band of brigands was formed, armed with deadly weapons, which roamed the specified provinces to commit robbery and other crimes by force and violence. The band’s actionsincluding murder, abduction, sequestration, and rapefully constituted the crime of bandolerismo under Section 1 of Act No. 518.

The appellants’ defenses, including denial and the claim that they merely followed unlawful orders from their superiors in the band, were rejected. The Court ruled that superiors in a band of brigands possess no lawful authority, and their subordinates are not obliged to obey unlawful orders. Both the issuers and executors of such orders are criminally liable.

Consequently, the death penalty was affirmed. The sentence was to be carried out in the public square of the capital of Albay on a day (not a legal holiday) appointed by the district judge, in accordance with Act No. 451. The appellants were also ordered to pay their proportionate share of the costs.