CRIMINAL LAW I NICOLE V.

REYES – MATEO

G.R. No. 173858, July 17, 2007 the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts. The two elements
Petitioner: ERNESTO GARCES necessary to hold petitioner liable as an accomplice are present: (1) community
Respondent: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES of criminal design, that is, knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct
Ponente: YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. participation, he concurs with the latter in his purpose; and (2) performance of
previous or simultaneous acts that are not indispensable to the commission
Topic: ACCOMPLICES of the crime.

FACTS:
1. AAA was on her way to the chapel when the five accused suddenly
appeared and approached her.

2. Pacursa covered her mouth with his hands and brought her inside a
nearby barn while the four others stood guard outside.

3. Inside the barn, Pacursa succeeded in having carnal knowledge of AAA.

4. After a while, the accused heard people shouting and calling for AAA.

5. At this point, petitioner Garces entered the barn, covered AAA’s mouth,
then dragged her outside. He also threatened to kill her if she reports the
incident.

6. Petitioner released AAA upon reaching the house of Florentino Garces.

ISSUE:
W/N petitioner is criminally liable as an accessory to the crime only

RULING:
No.
The facts show that petitioner participated in the commission of the crime even
before complainant was raped. He was present when Pacursa abducted
complainant and when he brought her to the barn. He positioned himself outside
the barn together with the other accused as a lookout. When he heard the shouts
of people looking for complainant, he entered the barn and took complainant away
from Pacursa.

Having known of the criminal design and thereafter acting as a lookout,

petitioner is liable as an accomplice, there being insufficient evidence to prove
conspiracy, and not merely as an accessory. As defined in the Revised Penal
Code, accomplices are those who, not being included in Article 17, cooperate in