Dear PAO,
My brother and his friends were charged with robbery in the Prosecutor’s Office. They told me that they meticulously planned to rob a convenience store, but my brother merely acted as a lookout. He did not carry a gun, nor did he take any items from the store. Can he still be convicted along with his friends?
-Joan
Dear Joan,
Yes, your brother may still be found guilty of robbery, as there exists criminal conspiracy to commit a felony between him and his friends.
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it (Article 8 of the Revised Penal Code). In People of the Philippines v. De Guzman, et al., GR 241248, June 23, 2021, the Supreme Court, through Associate Justice Edgardo Delos Santos, elaborated on the elements to determine whether conspiracy exists, to wit:
“The elements of conspiracy are the following: (1) two or more persons came to an agreement; (2) the agreement concerned the commission of a felony; and (3) the execution of the felony was decided upon. Proof of the conspiracy need not be based on direct evidence, because it may be inferred from the parties’ conduct indicating a common understanding among themselves with respect to the commission of the crime. Neither is it necessary to show that the two or more persons met together and entered into an explicit agreement setting out the details of an unlawful scheme or objective to be carried out. The conspiracy may be deduced from the mode or manner in which the crime was perpetrated, it may also be inferred from the acts of the accused evincing a joint or common purpose and design, concerted action and community of interest.
“Thus, the act of one is the act of all.”
In relation thereto, in the case of People of the Philippines v. Jesalva, GR 227306, June 19, 2017, the Supreme Court explained through Associate Justice Francis Jardeleza, that a conspirator does not need to execute the most dreadful act to be convicted of the crime that he/she participated in, to wit:
“To be a conspirator, one need not participate in every detail of the execution; he need not even take part in every act xxx. Each conspirator may be assigned separate and different tasks which may appear unrelated to one another but, in fact, constitute a whole collective effort to achieve their common criminal objective. Once conspiracy is shown, the act of one is the act of all the conspirators. The precise extent or modality of participation of each of them becomes secondary, since all the conspirators are principal.”
As the designated lookout, your brother participated in the collective effort to rob the convenience store. His participation contributed to the fulfillment of the common criminal objective, which was to commit robbery. Thus, he is considered as a principal to the crime who is equally liable as if he was the one who held the gun while robbing the store.
We hope that we were able to answer your queries. Please be reminded that this advice was based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.
We appreciate your trust and support.
Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net
