Você está na página 1de 17
IN RE: AVANCENA Case No. 197 “The Faker Lawyer © A was charged with £ document under the RPC. + He was suspended from the practice of law pending appeal. © The SC found him guilty. o Aserved his sentence. « He was granted conditional pardon by the president, * Even if there was a conditional pardon granted, the court still found him a disgrace +0 the law profession * A conditional pardon does not divest him of the said crime; it merely extinguished the penalty not yet served but nat the crime itself © Awas disbarred. ification of public Falsification of a Public Document Disbarment RLOL, R10.01, R10.02 CASE # 197 IN RE AVANCENA "The judiciary doesn’t care about your conditional pardon,” + Awas convicted of the crime of falsification of public document + The trial court held that he took advantage of the legal profession in committing the crime to defraud his clients + The evidence proved his guilt beyond reasonable doubt and he was suspended from the practice of law pending appeal and pending other actions the Supreme Court might take + The facts also state that A was extended a conditional pardon by the President. + The court held that his acts amounted to decelt, malpractice or misconduct in office which constitute grounds for his removal + His conditional pardon is of no moment since the pardon partially relieves him of the penal consequences of his acts but does not relieve him from disbarment PENALTY Disbarment 304 IN RE: ROVERO Case No. 237 “One More Chance” A. 1952 case + R was found guilty of fraudulently concealing a dutiable importation, + He was disbarred because his act was contrary to law and good morals B. 1980 case + Rfiled a petition for reinstatement claiming he was granted absolute unconditional pardon. n was denied. + After the 3° try of filing a petition at the age of 71 years old, the court said that R had proven that he had been a person of good moral character, «Absolute pardon had the effect of cleansing his crime, blots out the existence of his guilt + Rowas reinstated. eS CASE # 237 IN RE ROVERO (2 PART CASE) The judiciary forgives...just beg and straighten up” R was prosecuted for violation of the customs law by fraudulently concealing a dutiable import. The Supreme Court found his acts to be crimes involving moral turpitude and eventually disbarred him from the practice of law R filed two petitions within the next couple of yeers after being disbarred, asking the court “on bended knees” to reinstate him claiming his disbarment caused him mental anguish and untold misery but the Supreme Court did not grant his plea. About 28 years later, at the age of 71, R petitioned the Court to reinstate him to the bar once more The Supreme Court found that R had demonstrated that he had been rehabilitated and reformed to be it once more to be a member of the bar Evidence to this effect included R’s involvement verious educational and civic organizations, being appointed to the Provincial Board of Aklan, being 2 delegate of the Aklan chapter of the National Red Cross and being President of the Quezon City Lions Club and he was also granted an absolute and unconditional pardon Hence, the SC moved to reinstate R and ordered the return of his certificate of admission to the bar Disbarment 23 aS R101, R703 PENALTY Disbarment with eventual reinstatement CI-R1.O1, C7-R7.03 309 TN Re: DALMACIO DE Los ANGELES Case No. 211 “O Hustistya, Maawa Ka. * Dwas convicted of attempted bribery. * He appealed that he had 6 children to support and that if he ever committed a crime, it was merely an error of judgment. * Under the Rules, a member of the bar may be removed from office as attomey if he is convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. * A good moral character is a condition precedent for the continuance of being a lawyer * Bribery is a felony involving moral turpitude. + As much as the Court sympathizes with the plight of D, he must be disbarred. Disbarment RLOL R703 CASE # 214, IN RE DE LOS ANGELES "Save it for Oprahi” or “Ad Misericordiam is a fallacy!” + Atty. D was convicted of attempted bribery by final judgment + He was directed by the Supreme Court to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law + In his explanation he appealed to the mercy of the Court, stating that he had 6 children to support, all of which were very young and that they would bear the dishonor of his conviction * D also claimed that his conviction was an error of judgment + The acts of the D were indicative of moral turpitude and thus, he is deemed unfit to continue being a member of the bar PENALTY. Disbarment 309 IN RE: GUITERREZ Case No. 218 “Serial Lawyer * Gwas convicted of murder, * The widow of the deceased for his disbarment. * G claimed as his defense that he was granted conditional pardon. * The court denies this plea because what was granted to G was merely a conditional pardon, it does not blot out the existence of his guilt unlike that of an absolute pardon. * His conditional pardon merely remitted the unexecuted portion of his term. + There are rigid standards of mental and moral fitness for one to become a member of the bar, and these standards are of continuing character in that one must continue being mentally and morally right to sustain his being a member led a complaint Disbarment CASE # 218 IN RE GUTIERREZ *Grabe na ‘to - tanggal ka nal” + Atty. G was convicted by final judgment for the murder of F , former Mayor of Calapan + He was extended a conditional pardon, conditioned that he shall not violate any of the penal laws of the lippines which G used as his defense in the complaint for his disbarment * The crime of murder charged against G was qualified by treachery and aggravated by its having been committed by a band, by taking advantage of his official position as municipal mayor at the time and by the use of a motor vehicle + His conditional pardon does not relieve him of his administrative liability but merely relives him of the remaining term of his sentence * G was disbarred by the very nature of the crime charged against him and the circumstances of its commission regarcless of whatever pardon he may have bee granted PENALTY Disbarment ee RLG, R7.03 310 IN RE: VILLASANTA V. PERALTA 294-233 “Disqualified Immoral” ¢ Pwas married toR + Then, P courted V. * To have carnal knowledge with V, P procured a fake marriage certificate. * Pand V lived together as husband and wife. * V then discovered that P was previously married to someone else. «© Piwas found guilty for violation of Article 350 of the RPC. + Pwas found to be immoral, * Pmade a mockery of marriage © His conviction involves moral turpitude, CASE # 233 IN RE PERALTA “Carnal Knowledge at any Cost’, “Out of the Bar and Into Her Pants” +P, a successful Bar candidate, courted V, who fel in love with him. + In order to have carnal knowledge of her, P prepared a fake marriage contract and made her sign * He even arranged for a religious ceremony before a priest, who relied on the fake marriage contract. + The truth was soon learned by P’s “real” wife and charges for violation of Art. 350 were pressed. + Phas made a mockery of martlage which Is a sacred institution demanding respect and dignity. + His actions in this case were contrary to honesty, justice, and morality. PENALTY | Denied admission to the bar 3\\ 7h IN RE: Basa 292-199 “Promising Abductor” © B, 29 years old was admitted to the bars of California and Philippines. * He was found guilty of abduction with consent, © Such crime is a crime involving moral turpitude. + The violation cannot be lightly passed over ‘© But his promising, career may not be utterly ruined. Disbarment CASE # 199 IN RE BASA “AbductionABDUCTION = DISBARMENT” +B was admitted into the California and Philippine Bars. + Later on, he was charged and convicted of the crime of abduction with consent. + Undoubtedly, a inal conviction of abduction with consent constitutes a crime of moral turpitude. + “Moral turpitude” everything which loosely defined to include done contrary to justice, honestly, modesty, or good morals. PENALTY. Suspension of one year IR-1.01 R-7.03 31 Bike: tsapa 294-220 “Suspension after Prison” + Iwas convicted of the crime of concubinage and is now serving sentence. + Such crime involves moral turpitude * After his discharge from prison, I shall be suspended from office for one year. Disbarment, S=lyear CASE # 220 IN RE ISADA “Concubinage = Disbarment” I, a member of the Bar, was convicted of concubinage. The very essence of the crime of concubinage involves moral turpitude. Following the efinition of moral turpitude enunciated in the Basa case, it can be said that the act of ignoring the sanctity of marriage and cohabiting with another woman — would necessarily entail gross bad faith and malicious intent. PENALTY | Suspension of ore year JR=1.01 R-7.03 314 PEOPLE V, TUANDA 295-394 "Bol ing Jewelry” T received from H several pieces of jewelry to be sold by T’ on commission basis. After the agreed period, T, instead of returning the unsold pieces, issued three checks The checks were dishonored upon presentment. Notwithstanding notice of dishonor, T made no effort to settle her obligations. One information for estafa and three for BP22 was filed against her. She was convicted of the three BP22 cases. The offense of which she is found to be guilty with involved moral turpitude. The gravamen of the offense is the act of making and issuing worthless checks The crimes import deceit and violation of attomey’s oath Violation of BP22 CASE #394 PEOPLE v. TUANDA “Check the Checks First” T, a member of the Bar, was to sel pieces of jewelry to M worth about 36k, The deal was for her to turn over the proceeds as they accumulated and return all of the unsold tems at a specific date Instead of returning the unsold Jewelry, T issued three checks in M's favor, to cover the value of the jewelry. All three checks bounced (insufficient funds). Despite this, she did not attempt to settle her account with M. The courts convicted her of violation of BP22 and suspended her from the practice of law. She now appeals, saying that there was no intention to cause damage to Marquez when the checks were issued. The gravamen of the offense punished by BP22 is the act of making and issuing 2 worthless check or one dishonored upon presentation for payment, . Therefore, it is not necessary to: have ill Intent towards the recipient of the check for a BP22 violation to involve moral turpitude. several PENALTY [Motion to lift order of suspension is iy 5 Met Lee wNe-7.03 R-7.03 10 DE JESUS-PARAS V. VAILOCES 296 - 43 Bye-Vai-loces” + Vacknowledged the execution of D’s last will & testament which validity was impugned by D’s surviving spouse and daughter in the probate proceedings. * The probate court held that the will was forged. + Viwas charged, convicted of, & imprisoned for falsification of a public document + D's spouse & daughter filed a disbarment case against V. + The SC held that V must be disbarred as the crime involved moral turpitude. Disharment eo qo C7, R7.01 CASE # 143— /| 4) DE JESUS - PARAS v VAILOCES: “tama na, double jeopardy na eh!” + Vas notary public acknowledged the execution of 2 document purporting to be the last will and testament of D. + The probate court denied the probate to the on account that It was forged. Criminal action was filed against V on the ground of fa of public document. + He was found guilty beyond reasonable ground of the said crime. V began serving his sentence when this disbarment case was filled + As his defense, V pleads to the court that the case be dismissed because it will amount to double jeopardy. He also disputes the judgment of his falsification case that convicted him The plea of double jeopardy is untenable. The disbarment of an attorney does not partake of a criminal proceeding, + The decision being final and executory, the court is left with no recourse but to disbar him as he has been a convicted of a crime Involving moral turpitude. disbarred roy rN 315 IN RE:JARAMILLO 296~221 “Disharment is Not hihuman™ + J was convicted of the crime of estafa. + Inhis answer, J said that such conviction was a judicial error. * He said that the amount was lost, that his imprisonment and mental anguish constitute more than sufficient punishment, and that to disbar him is excessively inhuman. + The crime of estafa involves moral turpitude © Jwas disbarred. Disbarment. Disbarred arin iano — CASE # 221 IN RE JARAMILLO "“ESTAFA = DISBARMENT” J, a member of the Bar, was convicted of estafa in the Pangasinan courts + He claims that the courts erroneously disbelleved explanation of the loss of the amount Involved + The Solicitor General seeks his disbarment. * Moreover, the judgment for estafa has since become final and it kas even been executed. Thus, warranting his disbarment. (PENALTY | Disbarment 1 Cicgmma, Co LVSmmeR-1.01 R-7.03 3x2 IN RE: TERRELL 302~ 247 “Walang Takas” + Twas charged with estafa in connection with the organization of “Centro Bellas Artes” Club, an organization known to hisn to be created for the purpose of evading the law. © He was acquitted. * The Court ruled however that since the promotion of an organization for the purpose of violating or evading the penal laws amounted to such malpractice on the part of en attorney as will justify removal or suspension, ‘T should be suspended from the practice of law for a term of 1 year. CASE # 247 IN RE TERRELL “Don't be maarte” * T, a lawyer, was suspended for one year for practicing law for having assisted of the CBAC after he had been notified that the said n was made for the purpose of evading the law then in force in said city; and acting as attorney for such club. + Thad such knowledge that the organization was of such nature and character as to warrant his suspension from practice. + The promoting of organizations with knowledge of their objects, for the purpose of violating or evading the laws against crime constitutes such misconduct on the part of an attorney, which amounts to malpractice or gross misconduct. PENALTY Suspended for one year CSwey 493 PLATT. ABORDO 303-- 403 “Opium Adtic © Atty. A bought from two individuals a can of opium. + He discovered that it contained fake opium and sand. © He prosecuted them for the crime of estafa and had them convicted. + He claims that the act not having been done in the exercise of his profession as an attorney-at- law cannot constitute a ground for disciplinary action. © When an attorney's character shows he is unsafe and unfit to be trusted, the courts retain the power to discipline him. Promoting to violate or violating penal laws S=Tyear CASE # 403 PIATT VS. ABORDO "Sorry, promise ‘di a mauulit” + A (lawyer) bought opium from 2 individuals for 600. + However, it turns out that the packs contained fake opium and sand. + Areported to the police that he was robbed of P600, and later charged the 2 individuals of estafa. + Ais now being charged of gross misconduct. * The general rule is that a court will not assume jurisdiction to discipline one of its officers for misconduct alleged to be committed in his private capacity. + The exception to the rule is that an attorney will be removed not only for malpractice and dishonesty in his profession, but also for gross misconduct not connected with his professional duties, which show him to unfit for the office and unworthy of the privileges which his license and the law confer upon him, PENALTY Suspended for one year 28 6 A Riot C-L,R-1.02 IN RE: QUIAMBAO 304 ~ 235 “Quiambao Nagnakaw” * M, agent for Y, sold to Pa parcel of land. * Payment for the land was given by P to Atty. Q, M's brother. + Atty. Q promised P that the title over the land shall be transferred to P’s name. + P found that Y has not yet transferred the title to P’s name and that the land was not for sale as it was only held by Y as mortgagee. * Pasked for a refund from Atty. Q * The SC held Atty, Q was guilty of setting up the whole scheme so that he can get the payment for his own benefit. Atty. Q was disbarred. ‘Acts unbecoming of a member of the bar FENG Dstarmet Case # 235 IN RE: QUIAMBAO land scam, mag utol tandem” Atty. Q, through his brother M, P to purchase the parcel of land knowing fully well that the parcel of land was not for sale as the purported owner, Y Insurance company, vas just a mortgagee and not in a position to sel With this he succeeded in taking from P a sum of money php12000 which he appropriated for his own use a benef He fraudulently induced P to sign a document relieving him from obligation of paying the sum to P, and at the same time caused the latter to execute a document showing that he undertook to collect from M the sum he previously gave as no sale pushed through. The acts the respondent: showed shows that he is unworthy to continue as a member of the ber. PENALTY | disbarred Venremed C7, R7.03 255 IN RE: VICENTE SOTTO d- 243 Gayaliin si Sotto, Disbarment Sigurade!” * Atty, S is a practicing lawyer and at the same time, an editor of a newspaper of general circulation. + In one case, 5 blackmailed the adverse party into consenting to the rescission of a contract entered into by the client of S. * In another case, he also threatened another adverse party into agreeing to be his client while at the same time, still representing his current client, And in various other times, he employed threats and blackmails to force clients or adlverse parties into agreeing to his schemes. + The Court decided to disbar S for the deliberate plan to foster his own interests, by means of illicit use of his 2-fold capacity as attorney and newspaperman, professional Conduct RIS.OL C17, R20.04, R2LO1 CASE # 243 IN RE SOTTO “Talo ka ng lolo ni Vic Sotto” “Grave charges against a notary” * VS threatened to publish an article saying that S is an impostor if S does not follow VS’s demand. +S acceded to the demand, + VS was not satisfied and asked for money. In order to convince S, VS published an article in two newspapers imputing acts of fraud against S. +S maintained is silence, and reported the acts of VS to the court. * The Court found that VS acted with gross misconduct and disregarded the rules on professional ethics required to be observed by every lavyer. + VSIs disbarred, Penalty Disbarment C-19,R-19.01 1 Lizaso v. AMANTE 243-287 “Sanipung Porsyento, Garantisado * A promised a guaranteed 10% return if L invests in A’s casino business. « Lgave A P5000 but there were no returns * A alleged that the P5000 check given by L was in payment of L’s debt to A. © The Court decided to suspend A for dishonest and immoral conduct. * The Court held that as a general rule, court will not assume jurisdiction to discipline of its officers for misconduct in his private capacity. ‘* The Court however provides for exceptions by holding that an attorney may be disciplined for gross misconduct not connected with his professional duties if it is shown that he is unfit for office and unworthy of the privileges conferred by law. CASE # 287 LIZASO V AMANTE ‘Casino, Casino, bayaran mo ako” + L gave A a check to be invested in A’s casino business. + Anever paid L for her investment, nor returned the money she gave, even after A’s insistence. + L filed a sworn complaint for disbarment against A for deceitful and grossly immoral conduct. + The SC found that the A failed to return and account for L's money notwithstanding repeated demands from L. * It appeared that A tried to controvert L’s charges by using evidence documents that are falsified. * A lawyer will be removed not only for malpractice and dishonesty in his profession but also for gross misconduct not connected with his professional dutues which shows him to be unfit for the office and unworthy of the privileges which his license and the law confer upon him. + Alls suspended indefinitely, PENALTY Indefinite suspension RLOT R703 yl MELENDREZ V. DECENA 289 - 320 “1-2 Punch” + The spouses M hired D as lawyer in an estafa case « The defendant paid P300 to D as settlement but D did not inform M of such settlement. * M borrowed P4000 from D but D placed P5000 on the promissory note. © The spouses M were shocked to learn that their property was already conveyed to another and that the estafa case was already settled + The Court decided to suspend D. His acts are contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals. + The moral turpitude for which an attomey may be disbarred may consist of misconduct in either his professional or non-professional altitude. Malpractice and Breach of Trust CASE # 320 MELENDREZ V DECENA “formality jabroni” M obtained a loan, secured by real estate mortgage, from D. It was made to appear that the amount borrowed was P5,000 Instead of P4,000. D assured M that this was @ mere formality. M failed to pay, and D executed a second real estate mortgage on the property with an SPA authorizing D to sell the property at a public auction. D represented this to be another formality, so M did not try to pay for the obligation. D then. extrajudicially foreclosed the second real estate mortage. M then charged D with malpractice and breach of trust. It was held that D was in a better position financially, socially, and intellectually, and took advanted of M by always representing that the discrepancies were mere formalities. D's acts constitute deception and conduct unbecoming of a member of the bar, although done in his personal capacity. D Is disbarred. PENALTY Disbarment RLOL R7.03, R16.0L “1 RLOL; C15 - R15.05, C19, = R20.04 26d CONSTANTINO V. SALUDARES 26-94 “Conduct Unbecoming ofa Debtor” * Atty, $ borrowed P1,000 from C for an urgent personal obligation and S promised to pay it back the following day. * S failed to comply © C left the country and wrote to his father authorizing him to collect the debt. © S persistently refused. * Sadmits that he borrowed moncy, but reasoned that he wasn’t able to pay because C’s father did not appear at the agreed place of payment © S.was suspended for 3 months ere Penalty 6 Midi b WWenteem) R101, R7.03 CASE #94 CONSTANTINO V SALUDARES 'Unwarranted obstinacy” C charged Atty. S with conduct unbecoming of a lawyer for the non-payment of a loan which the latter obtained from his son. C's son left the country and authorized C to collec the loan 5 reasons out that C’s son falled to appear at the place of payment and cites the absence from the country of the son justify the non-payment, From the very beginning, respondent had no intention to honor or pay his just debt. We simply cannot close our eyes to the unwarranted obstinacy. A lawyer's professional and personal conduct must be beyond reproach and above suspicion.The facts and evidence establish respondent's failure to live up to his duties as a lawyer. Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer must not engage in unlawful, immoral or deceitful conduct, A member of the Bar must act with integrity, honesty and professional decorum. This dishonest act wes compounded by paltry excuses for his unwarranted refusal to pay @ valid & just debt. PENALTY Suspension for 3 months C1 = Ri.01; C7 = R7.03 120