| G.R. No. 128966 August 18, 1999 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EDWIN DE VERA y GARCIA, RODERICK GARCIA y GALAMGAM, KENNETH FLORENDO and ELMER CASTRO, accused, EDWIN DE VERA y GARCIA, appellant. Facts: “About 1:30 in the afternoon of June 8, 1992, while bringing out the garbage, the witness saw a car passing by, driven by victim Frederick Capulong together with four (4) other passengers. Moments later, Cacao the victim dragged out of the car by Florendo and brought to a grassy place. Florendo was holding a gun. Upon reaching the grassy spot, Florendo aimed and fired the gun at the victim, hitting him between the eyes. After the shooting, Florendo and his companions fled in different directions. The policemen went around the subdivision to look for possible suspects. They came upon a person wearing muddied maong pants and white t-shirt “standing and walking around’ near the clubhouse of the subdivision. When asked his name, the person identified himself as Edwin De Vera, herein appellant. Appellant claims that he had no part in the killing, and that it was Kenneth Florendo who had shot the victim. He avers that he merely accompanied to Filinvest the other accused and Florendo, who was his friend, upon the latter's request. A few hours after the shooting incident, appellant was picked up by the police, who subsequently tortured and coerced him into signing his Statement regarding the incident. The trial court summarized appellant's evidence in this wise of June 8th at around 10:30 am. Kenneth passed by Edwin's house to invite him back to Ithe former's] house that morning and to bring Elmer along. After lunch, Kenneth asked Edwin to go with him to Filinvest without telling why. It was Deo who mentioned to Edwin that Kenneth was going to see a friend. Edwin was not aware if Kenneth had also asked the others to go with him to Filinvest, but the four of them - Kenneth, Edwin, Elmer, and Deo - later proceeded to Filinvest in Kenneth's car. Edwin sat at the back seat. The time was past 12:00 noon. Kenneth drove his car. Upon reaching Filinvest, Kenneth stopped at a house and the four of them alighted in front of the house. Edwin did not know whose house it was. Kenne’h and Elmer told Edwin and Deo to wail near the car because they were going to see a friend. At that... point in time, Edwin knew the person whom Kenneth and Elmer went to see by name, never having met him personally before then. From his conversation with Deo, Edwin found out that the house was where Deo stayed. Edwin heard the voices of Kenneth and his friend and they appeared to be arguing Not before long, Edwin also heard a gunshot which came from where Kenneth and Elmer had gone to. He was shocked because he was not used to hearing gunfire. Frightened, he panicked and ran away from the place. His singular thought while running was to get out of Filinvest. Deo also ran away. Edwin denied that either he or Deo carried any firearm on that occasion. Appellant knew of Kenneth Florendo's malevolent intention. Appellant's companions were armed that day, a fact 4which revealed the unmistakable plan of the group. He cooperated with the other accused in the commission of the crime by placing himself at a certain distance from Kenneth and the victim in order to act as a lookout. Issues: Whether or not the trial court erred in convicting De Vera as principal? Held: No, De Vera cannot be convicted as principal. Ratio Decidendi: Revised Penal Code defines accomplices as "those persons who, not being included in Article 17, cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts," The Court has held that an accomplice is “one who knows the criminal design of the principal and cooperates knowingly or intentionally therewith by an act which, even if not rendered, the crime would be committed just the same." To hold a person liable as an accomplice, two elements must be present: (1) the “community” of criminal design; that is, knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct participation, he concurs with the latter in his purpose;" and (2) the performance of previous or simultaneous acts that are not indispensable to the commission of the crime. Thus, De Vera Anew'that Kenneth Florendo had intended to kill Capulong at the time, and he cooperated with the latter. But he himself did not participate in the decision to kill Capulong; that decision was made by Florendo and the others. He joined them that afternoon after the decision to kill had already been agreed upon; he was there because “nagkahiyaan na.” In any event, the prosecution evidence has not established that appellant was part of the conspiracy to kill the victim. His participation, as culled from his own Statement, was made after the decision to kill was already a a/t accompli Thus, in several cases, the Court has held: Lack of complete evidence of conspiracy, that creates the doubt whether they had acted as principals or accomplices in the perpetration of the offense, impels this Court to resolve in their favor the question, by holding that they were guilty of the ‘milder form of responsibilty, "ie, guily as mere accomplices. Therefore, De Vera cannot be convicted as principal and is CONVICTED as an accomplice,