Case Summary (Adm. Case No. 229)
Procedural History
The respondent was prosecuted and convicted of estafa in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan. On appeal, the Court of Appeals rendered a final decision (promulgated April 17, 1954) imposing an indeterminate penalty ranging from two months and one day of arresto mayor to one year and one day of prision correccional. While the respondent was serving his sentence, the Solicitor General filed the present complaint for disbarment on August 5, 1955. The criminal judgment had become final and its penalty had been executed by the time the Supreme Court resolved the disbarment action.
Respondent’s Contentions
In his answer to the disbarment complaint, the respondent contended that: (1) his criminal conviction was a judicial error and that the trial court mistakenly disbelieved his explanation for the loss of the funds involved; (2) the imprisonment and suffering he endured since the criminal prosecution amounted to sufficient punishment; and (3) further disciplinary action by disbarment would be unduly inhuman, humiliating, and cruel.
Court’s Legal Findings
The Court expressly recognized that the crime of estafa involves moral turpitude. The Court further observed that the conviction had become final and had been executed, and therefore the Court’s review of the criminal conviction was no longer open. Given the established conviction for an offense involving moral turpitude, the Court concluded that the respondent had demonstrated unfitness to remain a member of the bar and was unworthy of the privilege to practice law and to protect the administration of justice.
Disposition
The Supreme Court ordered the respondent disbarred. The respondent was directed to surrender his lawyer’s certificate to the Court within fifteen days from notice of the decision.
...continue readingCase Syllabus (Adm. Case No. 229)
Citation and Case Identity
- Reported at 101 Phil. 323 and identified as Administrative Case No. 229.
- Decision dated April 30, 1957.
- Captioned "IN THE MATTER OF DISBARMENT PROCEEDINGS VS. NARCISO N. JARAMILLO, RESPONDENT."
- Decision authored by PARAS, C.J.
Criminal Conviction: Nature and Source
- The respondent, Narciso N. Jaramillo, was prosecuted for and convicted of the crime of estafa in the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan.
- On appeal, the Court of Appeals rendered a final decision promulgated on April 17, 1954, sentencing the respondent to an indeterminate penalty.
- The indeterminate penalty imposed by the Court of Appeals ranged from two months and one day of arresto mayor to one year and one day of prision correccional.
Execution and Finality of the Criminal Judgment
- The criminal judgment convicting the respondent became final.
- The sentence was executed; at the time the Solicitor General filed the disbarment complaint, the respondent was serving the sentence.
Initiation of Disbarment Proceeding
- The Solicitor General filed the present complaint for the respondent’s disbarment in this Court on August 5, 1955.
- The disbarment action in this Court was initiated while the respondent was serving his sentence for the estafa conviction.
Respondent’s Answer and Contentions
- In his answer, the respondent contended that his conviction was a judicial error.
- He asserted that the trial court did not believe his explanation regarding the loss of the amount involved in the criminal case.
- The respondent argued that his imprisonment, sufferings, and mental anguish s