26. soriano v dizon

8/18/2019 26. Soriano v Dizon

1/28

FACTS:· Atty. Manuel Dizon was driving his brown Toyota Corolla with his wife. AlongAbanao Street, a ta i driver overtoo! hi" so he tailed the ta i driver until the lattersto##ed to "a!e a turn. $e berated the ta i driver and held hi" by his shirt. Tosto# the aggression, the ta i driver for%ed o#en his door %ausing the a%%used to fallto the ground. Ta!ing #ity on the a%%used who loo!ed elderly, the ta i driver got outof his %ar to hel# hi" get u#. &hen he was about to hit the ta i driver, he hit thea%%used in the %hest then he got u# again and was about to bo the ta i driver butthe latter %aught his 'st and turned his ar" around.

The a%%used went ba%! to his %ar and got his revolver "a!ing sure that the handlewas wra##ed in a hand!er%hief. The ta i driver was on his way ba%! to his vehi%lewhen he noti%ed the eyeglasses of the a%%used on the ground. $e #i%!ed the" u#intending to return the" to the a%%used. (ut as he was handing the sa"e to thea%%used, he was "et by the barrel of the gun held by the a%%used who 'red andshot hi" hitting hi" on the ne%!. $e fell on the thigh of the a%%used so the latter#ushed hi" out and s#ed o).· witness, Antonio (illanes, who %a"e to the aid of Soriano and brought thelatter to the hos#ital.o sustained a s#inal %ord in*ury, whi%h %aused #aralysis on the left #art of his bodyand disabled hi" for his *ob as a ta i driver.· Des#ite #ositive identi'%ation and overwhel"ing eviden%e, +es#ondentdenied that he had shot Co"#lainant· A#art fro" -his denial, +es#ondent also lied when he %lai"ed that he was theone "auled by Co"#lainant and two unidenti'ed #ersons· Although he has been #la%ed on #robation, +es#ondent has not yet /for 0years1 satis'ed his %ivil liabilities to Co"#lainant.· %onvi%ted, by 'nal *udg"ent, of frustrated ho"i%ide

2SS34: &hether or not frustrated ho"i%ide involves "oral tur#itude and where otnot guilt warrants disbar"ent.

$45D: 64S. D2S(A++4D.

· Moral tur#itude has been de'ned as 7everything whi%h is done %ontrary to *usti%e, "odesty, or good "orals an a%t of baseness, vileness or de#ravity in the#rivate and so%ial duties whi%h a "an owes his fellow"en, or to so%iety in general,

%ontrary to *usti%e, honesty, "odesty, or good "orals.8o 9ood "oral %hara%ter in%ludes at least %o""on honesty.· $o"i%ide "ay or "ay not involve "oral tur#itude de#ending on the degree of the %ri"e.o a uestion of fa%t and fre uently de#ends on all the surrounding %ir%u"stan%es

; a%t of aggression shown by res#ondent will not be "itigated by the fa%t that hewas hit on%e and his ar" twisted by %o"#lainant. 3nder the %ir%u"stan%es, thosewere reasonable a%tions %learly intended to fend o) the lawyer


2/28

; $e shot the vi%ti" when the latter was not in a #osition to defend hi"self.; To "a!e "atters worse, res#ondent wra##ed the handle of his gun with ahand!er%hief so as not to leave 'nger#rints.; his illegal #ossession of an unli%ensed 'rear" and his un*ust refusal to satisfy his%ivil liabilities· &here their "is%ondu%t outside of their #rofessional dealings is so gross as toshow the" "orally un't for their o=%e and unworthy of the #rivileges %onferredu#on the" by their li%ense and the law, the %ourt "ay be *usti'ed in sus#ending orre"oving the" fro" that o=%e.

4> (A>C

+?(4+T? S?+2A>?, A.C. >o. @ B

Complainant,

Present:

Panganiban, CJ,

Puno,Quisumbing,

Ynares-Santiago,

Sandoval-Gutierrez,

Carpio,

versus Austria Martinez,

Corona,

Carpio Morales,

Callejo, Sr.,


3/28

Az una,

!inga,

C"i o-#azario, andGar ia, JJ

Att$. MA#%&' ()*+#, Promulgated:

espondent. anuar$ /, 001

(&C)S)+#

P& C% )AM:

(efore us is a Co"#laint A=davit -E for the

disbar"ent of Atty. Manuel Dizon, 'led by +oberto

Soriano with the Co""ission on (ar Dis%i#ine /C(D1 of

the 2ntegrated (ar of the hili##ines /2( 1. Co"#lainant

alleges that the %onvi%tion of res#ondent for a %ri"e

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn1


4/28

involving "oral tur#itude, together with the

%ir%u"stan%es surrounding the %onvi%tion, violates Canon

E of +ule E.GE of the Code of rofessional +es#onsibility

- and %onstitutes su=%ient ground for his disbar"ent

under Se%tion of +ule EHI of the +ules of Court. -H

(e%ause of the failure of Atty. Dizon to sub"it his

Answer to the Co"#laint, the C(D issued a >oti%e dated

May G, GG0, infor"ing hi" that he was in default, and

that an e #arte hearing had been s%heduled for June EE,

GG0. -0 After that hearing, %o"#lainant "anifested that

he was sub"itting the %ase on the basis of the Co"#laint

and its atta%h"ents. -K A%%ordingly, the C(D dire%ted

hi" to 'le his osition a#er, whi%h he did on July ,

GG0. -@ Afterwards, the %ase was dee"ed sub"itted for

resolution.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn6


5/28

?n De%e"ber @, GG0, Co""issioner Teresita J.

$erbosa rendered her +e#ort and +e%o""endation, whi%h

was later ado#ted and a##roved by the 2( (oard of

9overnors in its +esolution >o. L 2 GGK I0 dated Mar%h

E , GGK.

2n his Co"#laint A=davit, Soriano alleged that

res#ondent had violated Canon E, +ule E.GE of the Code

of rofessional +es#onsibility and that the %onvi%tion of

the latter for frustrated ho"i%ide, - whi%h involved

"oral tur#itude, should result in his disbar"ent.

The fa%ts leading to res#ondents %onvi%tion were

su""arized by (ran%h @G of the +egional Trial Court of

(aguio City in this wise:



6/28

. The a%%used was driving his brown ToyotaCorolla and was on his way ho"e after gassing u# in#re#aration for his tri# to Con%e#%ion, Tarla% with his wife.Along Abanao Street, a ta i driver overtoo! the %ar drivenby the a%%used not !nowing that the driver of the %ar hehad overta!en is not *ust so"eone, but a lawyer and a#ro"inent "e"ber of the (aguio %o""unity who wasunder the inNuen%e of li uor. 2n%ensed, the a%%used tailedthe ta i driver until the latter sto##ed to "a!e a turn at-the Chugu" and Carino Streets. The a%%used also sto##edhis %ar, berated the ta i driver and held hi" by his shirt. Tosto# the aggression, the ta i driver for%ed o#en his door%ausing the a%%used to fall to the ground. The ta i driver!new that the a%%used had been drin!ing be%ause hes"elled of li uor. Ta!ing #ity on the a%%used who loo!edelderly, the ta i driver got out of his %ar to hel# hi" get u#.(ut the a%%used, by now enraged, stood u# i""ediatelyand was about to deal the ta i driver a 'st blow when thelatter bo ed hi" on the %hest instead. The a%%used felldown a se%ond ti"e, got u# again and was about to bo theta i driver but the latter %aught his 'st and turned his ar"around. The ta i driver held on to the a%%used until he %ouldbe #a%i'ed and then released hi". The a%%used went ba%!to his %ar and got his revolver "a!ing sure that the handlewas wra##ed in a hand!er%hief. The ta i driver was on his

way ba%! to his vehi%le when he noti%ed the eyeglasses of the a%%used on the ground. $e #i%!ed the" u# intending toreturn the" to the a%%used. (ut as he was handing thesa"e to the a%%used, he was "et by the barrel of the gunheld by the a%%used who 'red and shot hi" hitting hi" onthe ne%!. $e fell on the thigh of the a%%used so the latter#ushed hi" out and s#ed o). The in%ident was witnessed byAntonio (illanes whose testi"ony %orroborated that of theta i driver, the %o"#lainant in this %ase, +oberto Soriano. -I

2t was the #rose%ution witness, Antonio (illanes, who

%a"e to the aid of Soriano and brought the latter to the

hos#ital. (e%ause the bullet had la%erated the %arotid



7/28

artery on the left side of his ne%!, -B %o"#lainant would

have surely died of he"orrhage if he had not re%eived

ti"ely "edi%al assistan%e, a%%ording to the attending

surgeon, Dr. Fran%is%o $ernandez, Jr. Soriano sustained a

s#inal %ord in*ury, whi%h %aused #aralysis on the left #art

of his body and disabled hi" for his *ob as a ta i driver.

The trial %ourt #ro"ulgated its De%ision dated

>ove"ber B, GGE. ?n January EI, GG , res#ondent

'led an a##li%ation for #robation, whi%h was granted by

the %ourt on several %onditions. These in%luded

satisfa%tion of the %ivil liabilities i"#osed by -the %ourt in

favor of the o)ended #arty, +oberto Soriano. -EG

A%%ording to the unrefuted state"ents of

%o"#lainant, Atty. Dizon, who has yet to %o"#ly with this

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn10


8/28

#arti%ular underta!ing, even a##ealed the %ivil liability to

the Court of A##eals. -EE

2n her +e#ort and +e%o""endation, Co""issioner

$erbosa re%o""ended that res#ondent be disbarred

fro" the #ra%ti%e of law for having been %onvi%ted of a

%ri"e involving "oral tur#itude.

The %o""issioner found that res#ondent had not

only been %onvi%ted of su%h %ri"e, but that the latter also

e hibited an obvious la%! of good "oral %hara%ter, based

on the following fa%ts:

E. $e was under the inNuen%e of li uor while driving his %ar

. $e rea%ted violently and atte"#ted to assaultCo"#lainant only be%ause the latter, driving a ta i,had overta!en hi"

H. Co"#lainant having been able to ward o) his atte"#tedassault, +es#ondent went ba%! to his %ar, got a gun,wra##ed the sa"e with a hand!er%hief and shotCo"#lainant-, who was unar"ed



9/28

0. &hen Co"#lainant fell on hi", +es#ondent si"#ly#ushed hi" out and Ned

K. Des#ite #ositive identi'%ation and overwhel"ingeviden%e, +es#ondent denied that he had shotCo"#lainant

@. A#art fro" -his denial, +es#ondent also lied when he%lai"ed that he was the one "auled by Co"#lainantand two unidenti'ed #ersons and,

. Although he has been #la%ed on #robation, +es#ondenthas-, to date-, not yet satis'ed his %ivil liabilities toCo"#lainant. -E

?n July I, GGK, the Su#re"e Court re%eived for its

'nal a%tion the 2( +esolution ado#ting the +e#ort and

+e%o""endation of the 2nvestigating Co""issioner.

&e agree with the 'ndings and re%o""endations of

Co""issioner $erbosa, as a##roved and ado#ted by the

2( (oard of 9overnors.



10/28

3nder Se%tion of +ule EHI of the +ules of Court,

%onvi%tion for a %ri"e involving "oral tur#itude is a

ground for disbar"ent or sus#ension. (y su%h %onvi%tion,

a lawyer is dee"ed to have be%o"e un't to u#hold the

ad"inistration of *usti%e and to be no longer #ossessed of

good "oral %hara%ter. -EH 2n the instant %ase, res#ondent

has been found guilty and he stands %onvi%ted, by 'nal

*udg"ent, of frustrated ho"i%ide. Sin%e his %onvi%tion has

already been established and is no longer o#en to

uestion, the only issues that re"ain to be deter"ined

are as follows: E1 whether his %ri"e of frustrated

ho"i%ide involves "oral tur#itude, and 1 whether his

guilt warrants disbar"ent.

Moral tur#itude has been de'ned as everything whi%h is

done %ontrary to *usti%e, "odesty, or good "orals an a%t

of baseness, vileness or de#ravity in the #rivate and



11/28

so%ial duties whi%h a "an owes his fellow"en, or to

so%iety in general, %ontrary to *usti%e, honesty, "odesty,

or good "orals. -E0

The uestion of whether the %ri"e of ho"i%ide

involves "oral tur#itude has been dis%ussed in

International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) v. NLRC, -EK a

labor %ase %on%erning an e"#loyee who was dis"issed

on the basis of his %onvi%tion for ho"i%ide. Considering

the #arti%ular %ir%u"stan%es surrounding the %o""ission

of the %ri"e, this Court re*e%ted the e"#loyers %ontention

and held that ho"i%ide in that %ase did not involve "oral

tur#itude. /2f it did, the %ri"e would have been violative

of the 2++2s 4"#loy"ent oli%y +egulations and indeed a

ground for dis"issal.1 The Court e #lained that, having

disregarded the attendant %ir%u"stan%es, the e"#loyer "ade

a #ronoun%e"ent that was #re%i#itate. Further"ore, it was not

for the latter to deter"ine %on%lusively whether a %ri"e



12/28

involved "oral tur#itude. That dis%retion belonged to the

%ourts, as e #lained thus:

. Homicide may or may not involve moral

turpitude depending on the degree of the crime. Moraltur#itude is not involved in every %ri"inal a%t and is notshown by every !nown and intentional violation of statute,but whether any particular conviction involves moralturpitude may e a !uestion of fact and fre!uently dependson all the surrounding circumstances. " " ". -E@ /4"#hasissu##lied1

2n the 2++2 %ase , in whi%h the %ri"e of ho"i%ide did

not involve "oral tur#itude, the Court a##re%iated the

#resen%e of in%o"#lete self defense and total absen%e of

aggravating %ir%u"stan%es. For a better understanding of

that De%ision, the %ir%u"stan%es of the %ri"e are uoted

as follows:

. The fa%ts on re%ord show that Mi%osa -the 2++2e"#loyee was then urinating and had his ba%! turnedwhen the vi%ti" drove his 'st unto Mi%osaOs fa%e that thevi%ti" then for%ibly rubbed Mi%osaOs fa%e into the 'lthyurinal that Mi%osa #leaded to the vi%ti" to sto# the atta%!but was ignored and that it was while Mi%osa was in that#osition that he drew a fan !nife fro" the left #o%!et of his



13/28

shirt and des#erately swung it at the vi%ti" who releasedhis hold on Mi%osa only after the latter had stabbed hi"several ti"es. These fa%ts show that Mi%osaOs intention wasnot to slay the vi%ti" but only to defend his #erson. Thea##re%iation in his favor of the "itigating %ir%u"stan%es of self defense and voluntary surrender, #lus the total absen%eof any aggravating %ir%u"stan%e de"onstrate that Mi%osaOs%hara%ter and intentions were not inherently vile, i""oralor un*ust. -E

The #resent %ase is totally di)erent. As the 2( %orre%tly

found, the %ir%u"stan%es %learly evin%e the "oral

tur#itude of res#ondent and his unworthiness to #ra%ti%e

law.

Atty. Dizon was de'nitely the aggressor, as he

#ursued and shot %o"#lainant when the latter least

e #e%ted it. The a%t of aggression shown by res#ondent

will not be "itigated by the fa%t that he was hit on%e and

his ar" twisted by %o"#lainant. 3nder the %ir%u"stan%es,

those were reasonable a%tions %learly intended to fend o)

the lawyers assault.



14/28

&e also %onsider the trial %ourts 'nding of trea%hery as a

further indi%ation of the s!ewed "orals of res#ondent. $e

shot the vi%ti" when the latter was not in a #osition to

defend hi"self. 2n fa%t, under the i"#ression that the

assault was already over, the unar"ed %o"#lainant was

"erely returning the eyeglasses of Atty. Dizon when the

latter une #e%tedly shot hi". To "a!e "atters worse,

res#ondent wra##ed the handle of his gun with a

hand!er%hief so as not to leave 'nger#rints. 2n so doing,

he betrayed his sly intention to es%a#e #unish"ent for his

%ri"e.

The totality of the fa%ts un"ista!ably bears the

ear"ar!s of "oral tur#itude. (y his %ondu%t, res#ondent

revealed his e tre"e arrogan%e and feeling of self


15/28

i"#ortan%e. As it were, he a%ted li!e a god on the road,

who deserved to be venerated and never to be slighted.

Clearly, his inordinate rea%tion to a si"#le tra=% in%ident

reNe%ted #oorly on his 'tness to be a "e"ber of the legal

#rofession. $is overrea%tion also evin%ed vindi%tiveness,

whi%h was de'nitely an undesirable trait in any individual,

"ore so in a lawyer. 2n the tena%ity with whi%h he

#ursued %o"#lainant, we see not the #ersisten%e of a

#erson who has been grievously wronged, but the

obstina%y of one trying to assert a false sense of su#eriority

and to e a%t revenge.

2t is also glaringly %lear that res#ondent seriously

transgressed Canon E of the Code of rofessional

+es#onsibility through his illegal #ossession of an

unli%ensed 'rear" -EI and his un*ust refusal to satisfy his

%ivil liabilities. -EB



16/28

$e has thus brazenly violated the law and disobeyed

the lawful orders of the %ourts. &e re"ind hi" that, both in

his attorneys oath - G and in the Code of rofessional

+es#onsibility, he bound hi"self to obey the laws of the

land.

All told, Atty. Dizon has shown through this in%ident

that he is wanting in even a basi% sense of *usti%e. $e

obtained the benevolen%e of the trial %ourt when it

sus#ended his senten%e and granted hi" #robation. And

yet, it has been four years - E sin%e he was ordered to

settle his %ivil liabilities to %o"#lainant. To date,

res#ondent re"ains ada"ant in refusing to ful'll that

obligation. (y his e tre"e i"#etuosity and intoleran%e,

as shown by his violent rea%tion to a si"#le tra=%

alter%ation, he has ta!en away the earning %a#a%ity, good

health, and youthful vigor of his vi%ti". Still, Atty. Dizon



17/28

begrudges %o"#lainant the "easly a"ount that %ould

never even fully restore what the latter has lost.

Convi%tion for a %ri"e involving "oral tur#itude "ay

relate, not to the e er%ise of the #rofession of lawyers,

but %ertainly to their good "oral %hara%ter. - &here

their "is%ondu%t outside of their #rofessional dealings is

so gross as to show the" "orally un't for their o=%e and

unworthy of the #rivileges %onferred u#on the" by their

li%ense and the law, the %ourt "ay be *usti'ed in

sus#ending or re"oving the" fro" that o=%e. - H

&e also ado#t the 2( s 'nding that res#ondent dis#layedan utter la%! of good "oral %hara%ter, whi%h is anessential uali'%ation for the #rivilege to enter into the#ra%ti%e of law. 9ood "oral %hara%ter in%ludes at least%o""on honesty. - 0

2n the %ase at bar, res#ondent %onsistently dis#layeddishonest and du#li%itous behavior. As found by the trial%ourt, he had sought, with the aid of i%e Mayor DanielFarias, an out of %ourt settle"ent with %o"#lainants

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn24


18/28

fa"ily. - K (ut when this e)ort failed, res#ondent%on%o%ted a %o"#lete lie by "a!ing it a##ear that it was%o"#lainants fa"ily that had sought a %onferen%e withhi" to obtain his referral to a neurosurgeon. - @

The lies of Atty Dizon did not end there. $e went on tofabri%ate an entirely i"#lausible story of having been"auled by %o"#lainant and two other #ersons. - Thetrial %ourt had this to say:

The #hysi%al eviden%e as testi'ed to by no less than three/H1 do%tors who e a"ined -Atty. Dizon does not su##ort hisallegation that three #eo#le in%luding the %o"#lainanthel#ed ea%h other in !i%!ing and bo ing hi". The in*uries hesustained were so "inor that it is i"#robable-, if notdownright unbelievable-, that three #eo#le who he saidwere bent on beating hi" to death %ould do so littleda"age. ?n the %ontrary, his in*uries sustain the%o"#lainants version of the in%ident #arti%ularly when hesaid that he bo ed the a%%used on the %hest. . - I

5awyers "ust be "inisters of truth. >o "oral uali'%ationfor bar "e"bershi# is "ore i"#ortant than truthfulness.- B The rigorous ethi%s of the #rofession #la%es a#re"iu" on honesty and %onde"ns du#li%itous behavior.-HG $en%e, lawyers "ust not "islead the %ourt or allow it

to be "isled by any arti'%e. 2n all their dealings, they aree #e%ted to a%t in good faith.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn29http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn30http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn29http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftn30


19/28

The a%tions of res#ondent erode rather than enhan%e

#ubli% #er%e#tion of the legal #rofession. They %onstitute

"oral tur#itude for whi%h he should be disbarred. 5aw is a

noble #rofession, and the #rivilege to #ra%ti%e it is

bestowed only u#on individuals who are %o"#etent

intelle%tually, a%ade"i%ally and, e ually i"#ortant,

"orally. (e%ause they are vanguards of the law and the

legal syste", lawyers "ust at all ti"es %ondu%t

the"selves, es#e%ially in their dealings with their %lients

and the #ubli% at large, with honesty and integrity in a

"anner beyond re#roa%h. -HE

The foregoing abhorrent a%ts of res#ondent are not

"erely dishonorable they reveal a basi% "oral Naw.

Considering the de#ravity of the o)ense he %o""itted,

we 'nd the #enalty re%o""ended by the 2( #ro#er and

%o""ensurate.



20/28

The #ur#ose of a #ro%eeding for disbar"ent is to

#rote%t the ad"inistration of *usti%e by re uiring that

those who e er%ise this i"#ortant fun%tion be %o"#etent,

honorable and reliable lawyers in who" %ourts and

%lients "ay re#ose %on'den%e. -H Thus, whenever a

%lear %ase of degenerate and vile behavior disturbs that

vital yet fragile %on'den%e, we shall not hesitate to rid

our #rofession of odious "e"bers.

&e re"ain aware that the #ower to disbar "ust be

e er%ised with great %aution, and that disbar"ent should

never be de%reed when any lesser #enalty would

a%%o"#lish the end desired. 2n the instant %ase, however,

the Court %annot e tend that "uni'%en%e to res#ondent.

$is a%tions so des#i%ably and wantonly disregarded his



21/28

duties to so%iety and his #rofession. &e are %onvin%ed

that "eting out a lesser #enalty would be irre%on%ilable

with our lofty as#iration for the legal #rofession that

every lawyer be a shining e e"#lar of truth and *usti%e.

&e stress that "e"bershi# in the legal #rofession is

a #rivilege de"anding a high degree of good "oral

%hara%ter, not only as a %ondition #re%edent to ad"ission,

but also as a %ontinuing re uire"ent for the #ra%ti%e of

law. Sadly, herein res#ondent has fallen short of the

e a%ting standards e #e%ted of hi" as a vanguard of the

legal #rofession.

2n su", when lawyers are %onvi%ted of frustrated ho"i%ide,

the attending %ir%u"stan%es not the "ere fa%t of their%onvi%tion would de"onstrate their 'tness to re"ain in the

legal #rofession. 2n the #resent %ase, the a##alling


22/28

vindi%tiveness, trea%hery, and brazen dishonesty of

res#ondent %learly show his unworthiness to %ontinue as a

"e"ber of the bar.

&$4+4F?+4, +4S ?>D4>T MA>345 D2P?> is hereby

DISBARRED , and his na"e is ?+D4+4D ST+2CQ4> fro"

the +oll of Attorneys. 5et a %o#y of this De%ision be

entered in his re%ord as a "e"ber of the (ar and let

noti%e of the sa"e be served on the 2ntegrated (ar of the

hili##ines, and on the ?=%e of the Court Ad"inistrator

for %ir%ulation to all %ourts in the %ountry.

S? ?+D4+4D.

A !&M)+ 2. PA#GA#)3A#

Chief Justi%e


23/28

&Y#A!+ S. P%#+ '&+#A (+ A.Q%)S%M3)#G

Asso%iate Justi%e Asso%iate Justi%e

C+#S%&'+ Y#A &S-SA#!)AG+

Asso%iate Justi%e

A#G&')#A SA#(+2A'-G%!)& &*

Asso%iate Justi%e

A#!+#)+ !. CA P)+ MA. A')C)A A%S! )A-


24/28

MA !)#&*


A!+ C. C+ +#A C+#C4)!A CA P)+ M+ A'&S


+M&+ . CA''& +, S . A(+'5+ S. A*C%#A



25/28

(A#!& +. !)#GAM)#)!A 2. C4)C+-#A*A )+

Asso%iate Justi%eAsso%iate Justi%e

CA#C)+ C. GA C)A

Asso%iate Justi%e

-E +ollo, ##. E K.

- CA>?> E. A lawyer shall u#hold the %onstitution, obey the laws of theland and #ro"ote res#e%t for law and legal #ro%esses.

+ule E.GE A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, i""oral orde%eitful %ondu%t.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref2


26/28

-H Se%. . #is arment or suspension of attorneys y $upreme Court%grounds therefor . A "e"ber of the bar "ay be disbarred or sus#endedfro" his o=%e as attorney by the Su#re"e Court for any de%eit, "al#ra%ti%e,or other gross "is%ondu%t in su%h o=%e, grossly i""oral %ondu%t, or byreason of his %onvi%tion of a %ri"e involving "oral tur#itude, or for any

violation of the oath whi%h he is re uired to ta!e before ad"ission to #ra%ti%e .

-0 +ollo, #. H .

-K 2d., #. H@.

-@ 2d., ##. 0G 0@.

- The dis#ositive #ortion reads:

&$4+4F?+4, the Court hereby 'nds the a%%used, ATT6.MA>345 D2P?>, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the%ri"e of F+3ST+AT4D $?M2C2D4, as %harged. There beingone "itigating %ir%u"stan%e of voluntary surrender andone aggravating %ir%u"stan%e of trea%hery, the Courthereby i"#oses u#on hi" an indeter"inate #enalty of @"onths of arresto mayor as "ini"u" #eriod to @ years of

prision correccional as "a i"u" #eriod. The a%%used is also ad*udged %ivilly liable and is hereby

ordered to #ay unto the #rivate o)ended #arty, +obertoSoriano-, the following:

a. @, BH.GG as a%tual da"agesb. EGG,GGG.GG as "oral da"ages and%. EGG,GGG.GG as e e"#lary da"ages.

S? ?+D4+4D. /+ollo, #. 1

-I +TC De%ision, ##. EI EB rollo, ##. H 0. enned by Judge 4dilberto T.Claravall of (ran%h @G, +egional Trial Court, (aguio City.

-B 2d., ##. @ R EE E .

-EG robation ?rder, #. rollo, #. B.-EE +ollo, #. H.

-E 2( +e#ort, ##. 0 K.

-EH Nue& v. 'storga, 0K SC+A HKH, February I, GGK.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref13


27/28

-E0 International Rice Research Institute v. NLRC , E SC+A @G, @ , MayE , EBBH, #er >o%on, . %iting Can v. aling, EKK SC+A @@H, @@ @@I,>ove"ber , EBI , #er adilla, . *a+ Ng v. Repu lic , EG@ hil. , HG,De%e"ber H, EBKB, #er (arrera, . In Re asa, 0E hil. K, @, De%e"ber

, EB G, #er Mal%ol", .

-EK 2d.

-E@ 2d., #. @I . Citations o"itted.

-E 2d., ##. @ @I.

-EI +TC De%ision, #. K rollo, #. EG.

-EB 2( +e#ort, #. K.

- G 2, /na"e1, of /address1, do sole"nly swear that 2 will "aintain allegian%eto the +e#ubli% of the hili##ines 2 will support and defend its Constitutionand obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the duly %onstitutedauthorities therein 2 will do no falsehood nor %onsent to its %o""ission 2 willnot wittingly or willingly #ro"ote or sue any groundless, false, or unlawfulsuit nor give aid nor %onsent to the sa"e 2 will not delay any "ans %ause for"oney or "ali%e and will %ondu%t "yself as a lawyer a%%ording to the best of "y !nowledge and dis%retion with all good 'delity as well to the %ourts as to"y %lients and 2 i"#ose u#on "yself this obligation voluntarily, without any"ental reservation or #ur#ose of evasion. So hel# "e 9od. /4"#hasissu##lied1

- E The +TC De%ision is dated >ove"ber B, GGE, while the robation?rder is dated May H, GG .

- -eople v. *uanda , EIE SC+A @B , January HG, EBBG.

- H See Co v. ernardino , H0B hil. E@, January I, EBBI.

- 0 *an v. $a andal, G@ SC+A 0 H, February 0, EBB .

- K +TC De%ision, #. E rollo, #. @.

- @ 2d., ##. E R E .

- 2d, ##. EE E R E@ E .

- I 2d., ##. G R K.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref18http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref19http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref20http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref21http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref28http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref18http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref19http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref20http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref21http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref22http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref23http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref24http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref25http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref26http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref27http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref28


28/28

- B *an v. $a andal , su#ra.

-HG l es v. #eciem re, AC >o. KH@K, A#ril , GGK.

-HE Resurreccion v. $ayson , HGG SC+A E B, De%e"ber E0, EBBI, #er %uria".

-H *ing/#umali v. *orres, 0 SC+A EGI, A#ril E0, GG0 #e esus/-aras v.0ailoces, EEE hil. K@B, A#ril E , EB@E.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref29http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref30http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref31http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref32http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref29http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref30http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref31http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2006/jan2006/ac_6792.htm#_ftnref32

26. soriano v dizon

Documents