Title
IN RE: Lontok
Case
Decision Date
Apr 7, 1922
A lawyer convicted of bigamy, pardoned by the Governor-General, faced disbarment. The Supreme Court ruled the pardon nullified the conviction, restoring his right to practice law.
A

Summary of Charges

The Attorney-General seeks to remove Marcelino Lontok from his position as a lawyer due to his conviction for bigamy, an offense adjudicated by the Court of First Instance of Zambales. Lontok was sentenced on February 27, 1918, to eight years of imprisonment, a sentence upheld by the Supreme Court and further unsuccessfully challenged in the United States Supreme Court.

Pardon Issuance

On February 9, 1921, a pardon was granted to Marcelino Lontok by the Governor-General of the Philippines, which stated that the sentence for his conviction of bigamy was remitted provided that he did not engage in further misconduct. This pardon plays a crucial role in the disbarment proceedings.

Legal Framework for Disbarment

The legal provision underlying the disbarment is found in Section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows for the removal or suspension of a lawyer from the bar on the grounds of conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude. The question of whether bigamy, in this case, involves moral turpitude is undisputed.

Effect of Pardon on Disbarment Proceedings

A central issue in this case is the impact of the pardon on Lontok's professional standing. The government contends that while the legal consequences of the conviction are alleviated by the pardon, the moral implications remain. The respondent argues that the pardon effectively nullifies the basis for disbarment, thereby reinstating his status as a lawyer.

Judicial Precedents and Interpretation

The court draws upon various precedents regarding the effect of pardons on disbarment. It notes that in some cases, if disbarment actions are solely based on statutory provisions regarding felony convictions, a pardon could serve as a complete defense. Conversely, if disbarment concerns professional misconduct stemming from a felony, the underlying acts may still imply a lack of moral character despite the pardon.

Interpretation of Full Pardon

The court references the landmark case of Ex parte Garland, affirming that a pardon nullifies both the punishment and the guilt associated with an offense. It emphasizes that a full pardon restores civil rights and innocence

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.