Title
Office of the Court Administrator vs. Floro, Jr.
Case
A.M. No. RTJ-99-1460, 99-7-273-RTC, RTJ-06-1988
Decision Date
Mar 31, 2006
Judge Floro, deemed mentally unfit, dismissed for judicial misconduct, violating Canons of Judicial Conduct, after erratic behavior and improper actions.

Case Summary (A.M. No. RTJ-99-1460, 99-7-273-RTC, RTJ-06-1988)

Judicial Background and Psychological Evaluations

Floro first applied for a judgeship in 1995, but psychological evaluations deemed him unfit due to significant mental health issues, including evidence of ego disintegration and developing psychotic processes. Following a favorable second opinion that contradicted earlier findings, he was appointed as a Regional Trial Court (RTC) Judge on November 4, 1998. An audit initiated by the OCA in March 1999 revealed numerous irregularities in his judicial conduct.

Charges and Resolutions

The Court identified 13 acts or omissions that warranted administrative charges against Judge Floro, including violations of Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, inappropriate conduct in court, partiality in criminal cases, practicing law while serving as a judge, and using his chambers for personal interests. The Court recommended a psychological examination and placed Floro under preventive suspension during the investigation.

Administrative Proceedings and Findings

Floro engaged in a series of defense arguments against the findings of misconduct, insisting that his actions were within legal bounds or performed under duress. His pattern of behavior during hearings, including failed legal practices and unprofessional remarks, drew attention to his mental state, as suggested by witnesses and court records, including instances of his erratic judgments and language.

Mental Health Evaluations and Conduct

Multiple evaluations affirmed Judge Floro’s declining cognitive functions and signs of psychosis. His repeated claims of possessing psychic abilities and engaging in bizarre behavior—such as claiming to communicate with "dwarfs"—further complicated his legal standing. The psychological assessments indicated significant impairments that affected his ability to function adequately as a judge.

Administrative Decision

The Court ultimately found Floro guilty of simple misconduct and gross ignorance of the law, among other charges, although it did not classify his acts as outright gross misconduct or corruption. Consequently, Floro's behavior was deemed indicative of a mental impairment that precludes him from performing judicial duties.

Separation and Back Compensation

As a result of his mental health condition, Floro was separated from his judicial role. The Court ruled he was entitl

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.