as defined in Article 8 of the Revised Penal Code:
- Agreed and decided to commit. Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concern the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.
as defined in People v Akiran:
- Concurred and affirmed. If someone fully concurred in the criminal resolution and affirmed their assent.
- Cooperated and carried out the resolution. When someone fully and directly cooperated and did their part to carry out the resolution of their co-accused.
as defined in Buebos v. People
- Inferred from common understanding of parties. Proof of agreement need not rest on direct evidence. The same can be inferred from the conduct of the parties indicating a common understanding among them with respect to the commission of the offense.
- Need no explicit agreement. It is not necessary to show that two or more persons met together and entered into an explicit agreement setting out the details of an unlawful scheme or the details by which the details of an illegal objective be carried out.
- Concerted action. Common design. Comspiracy sufficient if evidence proves the accused parties acted in concert, each of them doing his part to fulfill the common design.
- Act of one, act of all. Equally guilty. The act of one is the act of all and each of the accused will be deemed equally guilty of the crime committed.
- Confederacy of purpose, Coordinated movements, behavior during and after the crime. Established through the accused’s behavior contemporaneous or after the commission other crime, clearly indicating confederacy of purpose and concerted action.
- It is very seldom that crimes are agreed upon through writing. Even if there’s no direct evidence showing prior agreement, doctrine is well settled that conspiracy need not be proved by direct evidence of prior agreement to commit a crime. It is very seldom that prior agreement are demonstrable since it is very rare that criminal undertakings are agreed through writing.