G.R. No. 115192 - People vs. Salas

Julio Zeta filed an administrative complaint against Felicisimo Malinao, a court interpreter of the Court of First Instance (CFI) of Catbalogan, Samar.
The complaint charged Malinao with:

Illegally appearing in municipal courts as counsel without being an attorney and collecting fees, competing unfairly with licensed attorneys.
Grave misconduct by instigating people, especially in his barrio, to commit land grabbing, robbery, or coercion, leveraging his supposed influence as a court employee.
Falsification of his time records by filing for presence in the CFI while practicing privately in municipal courts, thereby unlawfully collecting salary for absent days.
Violating executive orders and the Civil Service law prohibiting civil service employees from private practice without permission from their department head.

Malinao denied violating laws or Civil Service rules, particularly Section 12, Rule XVIII.
He argued his participation as counsel was gratuitous to assist indigent defendants due to absence of counsel in the locality.
He attached supporting documents, including a motion to withdraw exhibits filed by counsel of record, to substantiate his defense.

The Department of Justice referred the complaint for investigation to the CFI Judge Segundo Zosa.
Despite inability to subpoena the complainant who appeared fictitious, the court investigated by interviewing local municipal judges.
Judges of Sta. Rita, Daram, and Zumarraga confirmed Malinao’s appearances as counsel in various civil and criminal cases over several years.
Comparison of Malinao’s time records with court appearances showed discrepancies:

He claimed presence in office while simultaneously appearing in municipal courts on the same dates.
Some dates were recorded as leave yet he appeared in court.

No plausible explanation was offered for these irregularities.
The judge recommended a stern warning and severe reprimand for falsification, and noted Malinao’s violation of Civil Service rules for unauthorized private practice.

The Court found the investigator’s factual conclusions supported by documentary evidence and witness declarations.
Malinao unlawfully appeared as counsel without permission, falsified his time records, and engaged in illegal practice of law.
The defense that his representation was gratuitous was insufficient to justify violations, especially with falsified records concealing absences.
The frequency of such appearances suggested a regular practice for consideration beyond altruism.
The offenses were grave, warranting dismissal rather than mere reprimand.

Whether or not respondent violated Civil Service rules by engaging in private practice without permission.
Whether respondent is guilty of illegal practice of law by appearing as counsel despite not being an attorney.
Whether respondent falsified his time records by misrepresenting his attendance in office.
The appropriate administrative sanction for the proven violations.