Case Digest (G.R. No. 120921)
Facts:
In Melvyn G. Garcia v. Atty. Raul H. SesbreÃo (752 Phil. 463; October 5, 2015), Dr. Melvyn G. Garcia filed two separate complaints for disbarment—A.C. No. 7973 before the Office of the Bar Confidant on July 30, 2008, and A.C. No. 10457 (CBC Case No. 08-2273) before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines–Commission on Bar Discipline on July 29, 2008—alleging that respondent Atty. Raul H. SesbreÃo was practicing law despite his 1999 conviction by the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City, Branch 18, for homicide (as modified by this Court in People v. SesbreÃo, 372 Phil. 762 [1999]), and that he remained on parole without having fully served his sentence. Garcia’s first complaint arose from an earlier support case for his two daughters that was dismissed; his second focused solely on SesbreÃo’s alleged violation of Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court regarding conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude. The IBP-CBD consolidated both cases, investigated whether homicide inCase Digest (G.R. No. 120921)
Facts:
- Case Background
- Two disbarment complaints filed by Dr. Melvyn G. Garcia against Atty. Raul H. Sesbreño, docketed A.C. No. 7973 and A.C. No. 10457.
- Consolidation by the Supreme Court on 30 September 2014.
- A.C. No. 7973 (Office of the Bar Confidant)
- Filed 30 July 2008. Garcia alleged that Sesbreño, despite a 1993 homicide conviction (RTC Cebu City, Branch 18, Crim. Case No. CBU-31733) and being on parole, continued practicing law.
- Underlying dispute: support actions filed by Sesbreño for Garcia’s daughters, dismissed for lack of merit; refiled upon Garcia’s return from Japan in 2007.
- Respondent’s defense: complaint motivated by resentment; similar case pending before IBP-CBD (CBC Case No. 08-2273).
- A.C. No. 10457 (IBP-CBD CBC Case No. 08-2273)
- Filed 29 July 2008 before the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline. Alleged violation of Section 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court by practicing law despite a moral-turpitude crime conviction.
- Respondent’s answer: sentence commuted; homicide not necessarily involving moral turpitude; complainant’s malice.
- IBP-CBD Proceedings and Recommendations
- Cases consolidated; sole issue agreed: whether homicide is a crime involving moral turpitude.
- IBP-CBD found that the circumstances (unprovoked shooting of innocent bystanders) exhibited moral turpitude; recommended disbarment.
- IBP Board of Governors adopted the recommendation in Resolution No. XX-2013-19 (12 February 2013) and denied reconsideration in Resolution No. XX-2014-31 (11 February 2014).
- Records transmitted to the Office of the Bar Confidant on 20 May 2014.
- Supreme Court Action
- Consolidated both cases in Resolution dated 30 September 2014.
- Only issue presented: whether a homicide conviction involves moral turpitude warranting disbarment.
Issues:
- Whether conviction for the crime of homicide involves moral turpitude under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, justifying disbarment.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)