You are on page 1of 3

Article 18

They know the criminal intention because they

Accomplices

themselves have decided upon such course of action


Accomplices:
They come to know about it after the principals have

Accomplices are persons who, not being included in Article

reached the decision, and only then do they agree to

17, cooperate in the execution of the offense by previous

same purpose to accomplish the criminal objective,

cooperate in its execution


Conspirators:
They decide that a crime should be committed
Accomplices:
They do not decide but merely concur in it
Conspirators:
They are the authors of the crime
Accomplices:
They are merely instruments who perform acts

those who cooperated by previous or simultaneous

essential to the perpetration of the offense

simultaneous acts
-

The participation of an accomplice presupposes the


commission of the crime by the principal by direct

participation
When there is no conspiracy between or among the

defendants but they were animated by one and the

acts but cannot be held liable as principals are


-

accomplices
An accomplice does not enter into a conspiracy with

REQUISITES TO BE AN ACCOMPLICE
1)

the criminal design of the principal by direct

a previous agreement or understanding with the

participation, he concurs with the latter in his

principal to commit the crime, But he participates to a


-

certain point in the common criminal design


The accomplice gets a penalty one degree lower than

2)

felony
Where there is doubt as to whether the accused acted

supplying material or moral aid in the execution of


3)

the crime in an efficacious way


That there be a relation between the acts done by the

as a principal or as an accomplice, accused should be

principal and those attributed to the person charged

held liable only as accomplice


Mere presence at the scene of the incident,

as an accomplice

knowledge of the plan and acquiescence

That there be a community of design; that is, knowing the

thereto are not sufficient grounds to hold a

criminal design of the principal by direct participation, he

person a conspirator
Lacking sufficient evidence of conspiracy

concurs with the latter in his purpose

and there being no doubt as to whether

which the law punishes is the assistance which is

accomplice, the doubt should be resolved in

knowingly or intentionally given and which is not

his favor and is thus held liable only as an


-

possible without previous knowledge of the criminal

accomplice
The participation of the accused must be

purpose principal originates the criminal design and


the accomplice merely concurs with the principal in

established by the prosecution by positive


and competent evidence.

Before there could be an accomplice, there must be a


principal by direct participation. The cooperation

appellant acted as a principal or a mere

his criminal purpose.


How does an accomplice acquire knowledge of the
criminal design of the principal?

QUASI-COLLECTIVE CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY


-

purpose
That he cooperates in the execution of the offense by
previous or simultaneous acts, with the intention of

that provided for the principal in a consummated


-

That there be a community of design; that is, knowing

the principal by direct participation. He does not have

Some of the offenders in the crime are principals and

1)

When

2)

accomplice of the formers criminal purpose


When the accomplice saw the criminal acts of the

the other are accomplices

Conspirators:
They know and agree with the criminal design
Accomplices:
They know and agree with the criminal design

principal

informs

or

tells

the

principal

ACCOMPLICE V CONSPIRATOR
-

the

Concurrence with the criminal purpose of another


may make one a co-principal
Even if only one of the offenders originated
the criminal design and the other merely

Conspirators:

concurred with him in his criminal purpose,

but before the actual commission of the

Being present and giving moral support when a crime

crime both of them agreed and decided to

is being committed will make a person responsible

commit it, the other is not merely an


accomplice. He is also a principal because he

only as an accomplice in the crime committed


Absent knowledge of the criminal purpose of

agreed and decided to commit a felony with

the principal, giving aid or encouragement,

another.

either

morally

or

materially,

in

the

commission of the crime, mere presence at

If there is no knowledge of the criminal design of the


-

the scene does not make one an accomplice


Moral aid may be through advice, encouragement or

principal, he is not an accomplice.


The accomplice intends by his acts, to commit or take

part in the execution of the crime


The community of design need not be to commit the

agreement
The responsibility of the accomplice is to be
determined by acts of aid and assistance, either prior

crime actually committed. It is sufficient if there was a

to or simultaneous with the commission of the crime,

common purpose to commit a particular crime and

rendered knowingly for the principal therein, and not

that the crime actually committed was a natural or

by mere fact of having been resent at its execution,

probable consequence of the intended crime

unless the object of such presence was to encourage


the principal or to apparently or really increase the

That he cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous

odds against the victim. Such an intent, concurring

or simultaneous acts, with the intention of supplying material

with some overt act, must be specifically shown by the

or moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious

evidence of the prosecution

way
-

Like the principal by cooperation under par. 3 of


Article 17, the accomplice cooperates with the
principal by direct participation but the cooperation
of the accomplice is only necessary and not
indispensable. However, if there is conspiracy among

That there be a relation between the acts done by the


principal and those attributed to the person charged as an
accomplice
-

criminal design as that of the principal. There must be

several persons, even if the cooperation is only


-

necessary, the latter is also a principal by conspiracy.


When the acts of the accused are not indispensable in

the killing, they are merely accomplices


The accomplice merely supplies the principal with

a relation between the criminal act of the principal by


direct participation and that of the person charged as
-

latter
The wounds inflicted by an accomplice in crimes
against persons should not have caused the death of

ACCOMPLICE V PRINCIPAL IN GENERAL


-

induce others to commit it, or who does not cooperate


in the commission of the crime by another act without

not have inflicted a mortal wound otherwise

becomes

principal

by

design is the person who committed the


2)

resulting crime
The accomplice, after concurring in the
criminal

purpose

of

the

which it would not have been accomplished, yet

direct

participation
RULES in cited cases:
1) The one who had the original criminal

principal,

An accomplice is one who does not take a direct part


in the commission of the act, who does not force or

the victim
The person charged as an accomplice should
he

accomplice.
An accomplice may be liable for a crime different
from that which the principal committed

material and moral aid without conspiracy with the


-

It is not enough that a person entertains tan identical

cooperates in the execution of the act by previous or


simultaneous actions.
ACCOMPLICE V PRINCIPAL BY COOPERATION
-

The participation of an offender in a case of


complicity, although necessary, is not indispensable as
in the case of a co-principal by cooperation

cooperates by previous or simultaneous


3)

acts
The

accomplice

in

crimes

against

persons does not inflict the more or


most serious wounds

ACCOMPLICE V PRINCIPAL BY DIRECT PARTICIPATION


1)

In both, there is a community of criminal design


Accomplices:

Cooperate in the execution of the offense by

in favor of lesser responsibility, that is, of a mere

a previous or simultaneous acts other than


those which would characterize them as
2)

3)

accomplice.
Between or among principals liable for the same

principals pursuant to Article 17 of the RPC


As to the acts performed, there is not clear cut

offense, there must be conspiracy; but between

distinction between the acts of the accomplice

conspiracy

and those of the principal by direct participation.


That is why, in case of doubt, it shall be resolved

the principals and the accomplices, there is no