Case Summary (A.C. No. 9608)
Complaint and Allegations
Complainant Ventura filed a complaint for disbarment or suspension against Respondent Samson on July 29, 2004, based on allegations of immoral conduct. Ventura claimed that she was a victim of rape and qualified seduction by Samson when she was 13 years old. Within her sworn statements, Ventura detailed incidents occurring in December 2001 and March 2002 at the respondent's residence and poultry farm, where she alleged he forced her into sexual intercourse and subsequently made threats against her life.
Respondent's Counter-Affidavit
In response, Samson admitted sexual intercourse occurred but contended it was consensual. He suggested that the complainant's willingness to accept money indicated there was no immorality in their actions. Moreover, he alleged that the complaint stemmed from a vendetta by Corazon Ventura, the complainant's mother, alleging that she sought revenge after being terminated from his law office.
Preliminary Investigation and Prosecutorial Actions
The Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Agusan Del Sur initially dismissed the rape charges but found probable cause for qualified seduction, leading to subsequent legal actions. Ventura filed motions for reconsideration that were denied, and further appeals were made to the Department of Justice, which upheld the prosecutor's findings. Eventually, both Ventura and her mother executed affidavits of desistance, retracting their complaints.
Administrative Proceedings and IBP Recommendations
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) conducted its investigation and suggested discipline based on the moral implications of Samson's conduct. Despite the criminal case's dismissal, the IBP found that the actions of Samson warranted suspension due to immorality, resulting in a recommendation for a one-year suspension.
Motions for Reconsideration
Both parties submitted motions for reconsideration regarding the IBP's resolution. Ventura argued that the suspension was insufficient given the severity of the respondent's actions, while Samson maintained that his actions did not constitute immorality, claiming Ventura had not proven her age and that the sexual encounter was consensual.
Standards of Professional Responsibility
The decision references the Code of Professional Responsibility, emphasizing that lawyers must uphold laws, act with honesty and integrity, and avoid behavior that may reflect poorly on their fitness to practice law. It highlights that a lawyer's ethical conduct, whether public or private, should align with the highest moral standards.
Findings on Immoral Conduct
The Supreme Court found the respondent's admission of sexual relations, particularly with a minor, constituted grossly immoral
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 9608)
Overview of the Case
- The case involves a disbarment complaint filed by Maria Victoria B. Ventura against Atty. Danilo S. Samson.
- The complaint alleges grossly immoral conduct as defined under the Code of Professional Responsibility.
- Atty. Samson is accused of committing acts of sexual abuse against the complainant, who was only 13 years old at the time.
Background Information
- Maria Victoria B. Ventura filed the complaint on July 29, 2004, citing incidents of rape and qualified seduction.
- Respondent Atty. Danilo S. Samson admitted in his Counter-Affidavit that sexual intercourse occurred between him and the complainant.
- The Office of the Provincial Prosecutor found no probable cause for rape but did for qualified seduction, leading to an Information being filed on July 4, 2002.
Details of the Allegations
- Ventura's sworn statement detailed two incidents of sexual assault: one in December 2001 and another on March 19, 2002.
- During the assault in December, Ventura reported being awoken by Samson, who forcibly initiated sexual intercourse.
- In March, Ventura claimed she was taken to a poultry farm where she was again assaulted, after which Samson allegedly gave her money and threatened her.
Respondent's Defense
- Atty. Samson contended that the encounters were consensual and that there was no grossly immoral conduct on his part.
- He claimed that the allegations were part of a conspiracy instigated by Corazon Ventura, a former employee who held a grudge against him.
- He denied the complainant’s age claims and suggested that the encounters were mutual agr