PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. RUDY FRONDA
G.R. Nos. 102361-62 May 14, 1993
Facts:
At about 6:00 o'clock in the morning of June 11, 1986, the deceased Eduardo (Edwin) Balaan And Esminio Balaan who are brothers, were take by seven (7) armed men in fatigue uniform with long firearms, suspected to be NPA members, accompanied by accused Rudy Fronda and Roderick Padua from the house of one Ferminio Balaan, at Barangay Cataratan, Allacapan, Cagayan. The said Rudy Fronda and Roderick Padua are residents of the same place. The armed men tied the hands of the deceased at their back lying down face downward, in front of the house of Ferminio Balaan. The armed men together with Roderick Padua and Rudy Fronda proceeded towards sitio Tulong, Cataratan, Allacapan, Cagayan passing through the ricefields (taking along with them the Balaan brothers). After that, the NPA's instructed them to go home, but in the afternoon of the same day June 11, 1986, Robert Peralta, alias Ka Jun, sent Elmer Martinez, Orlando Gonzales, George Peralta and Librado Duran to get him and further he was ordered to get a spade and a crowbar used in digging the hole where the Balaan brothers were buried. Appellant was the one who pointed the location where the victims' bodies buried. Appellant for a period of more than three (3) years, failed to report the incident to the authorities, and he did not in any way object, when he was ordered to tie the hands of the victims.
Issue:
Whether or not Rudy Fronda was an accomplice
Held:
Article 18 of the Revised Penal Code provides that an accomplice is one who, not being a principal, "cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts". Under this provision, a person is considered as an accomplice if his role in the perpetration of the crime is of a minor character. To be convicted as such, it is necessary that he be aware to the criminal intent of the principal and thereby cooperates knowingly or intentionally by supplying material or moral aid for the efficacious execution of the crime. In the case at bar, records indicate that appellant was seen being handed by and receiving from one of the armed men a hunting knife. Also, as aforesaid, appellant was not able to explain his failure to report the incident to the explain his failure to report the incident to the authorities for more than three (3) years. These circumstances, among others, establish the fact that appellant consciously concurred with the acts of the assailants.