People Vs Devera

Affle John L.
Leonor
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. EDWIN DE VERA y GARCIA, RODERICK
GARCIA y GALAMGAM, KENNETH FLORENDO and ELMER CASTRO
G.R. No. 128966
Ponente: Justice Panganiban
Date of Promulgation: August 18, 1999
FACTS:
About 1:30 in the afternoon of June 8, 1992, a car driven by Frederick Capulong
together with four (4) other passengers passed by at Filinvest II. Two of the passengers
were identified as Kenneth Florendo and Roderick Garcia. As it was cruising around
Denver Loop Street, a circular road whose entrance and exit were through the same
point unintelligible voices coming from the car was heard. The car parked. Moments
later, Capulong was 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, with the use of a .22 cal. with trade mark "Paspar Armas" bearing
SN-29069 with five (5) pieces of caliber 22 ammo inside and a .32 cal. firearm of still
undetermined make, hitting him between his eyes and striking him with the use of a
baseball bat in the mouth, thereby inflicting upon him serious and mortal wounds which
were the direct and immediate cause of his untimely death. After the shooting, Florendo
and his companions fled in different directions. Following the investigation, the
policemen brought the suspects to the Philippine National Police Crime Laboratory for
paraffin testing. The result: "both hands of Edwin de Vera gave positive results in the
test for gunpowder nitrates while both hands of Roderick Garcia gave negative result in
the test for gunpowder nitrates."
De Vera 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. Surveillance and
follow-up operations were conducted against Florendo and his other companion, Elmer
Castro. However, the two were never arrested and brought to trial.
The trial court found that the killing was attended by treachery, evident premeditation
and abuse of superior strength.. Edwin De Vera, Roderick Garcia, Kenneth Florendo
and Elmer Castro were charged with murder.
ISSUES:
Whether Edwin De Vera a conspirator or an accomplice?
RULING:
The Court held that De Vera presence was not innocuous. Knowing that Florendo
intended to kill the victim and that the three co-accused were carrying weapons, he had
acted as a lookout to watch for passersby. He was not an innocent spectator; he was at
the locus criminis in order to aid and abet the commission of the crime. These facts,
however, did not make him a conspirator; at most, he was only an accomplice. 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. Conspirators and accomplices have one thing in common: they know and agree
with the criminal design. Conspirators, however, know the criminal intention because
they themselves have decided upon such course of action. Accomplices come to know
about it after the principals have reached the decision, and only then do they agree to
cooperate in its execution. Conspirators decide that a crime should be committed;
accomplices merely concur in it. Accomplices do not decide whether the crime should
be committed; they merely assent to the plan and cooperate in its accomplishment.
Conspirators are the authors of a crime; accomplices are merely their instruments who
perform acts not essential to the perpetration of the offense. The Court ruled that there
is only one generic aggravating circumstance, because treachery absorbs abuse of
superior strength.

People Vs Devera

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

People Vs Devera

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

People Vs Devera

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Affle John L.

You might also like