In Re Del Rosario, 52 Phil 399
Subject: Basic Legal Ethics
FACTS
Felipe Del Rosario was a
candidate in the bar examination who failed for the second time in 1925. He
presented himself for the succeeding bar examination in 1926 and again was
unable to obtain the required rating. Then on 29 March 1927, he authorized the
filing of a motion for the revision of his papers for 1925 based on alleged
mistakes in the computation of his grades. The Court granted this motion and
admitted him to the bar. HOWEVER, a subsequent investigation by the city fiscal
uncovered that Del Rosario, together with one Juan Villaflor, a former employee
of the Supreme Court, falsified some documents to make it appear that Del
Rosario actually passed the 1925 bar exams. The two were subsequently charged
with falsification. Villaflor was convicted as he pleaded guilty, but Del
Rosario was acquitted for lack of evidence. The fiscal however recommended Del
Rosario to surrender his certificate of attorney.
ISSUE
Whether or not Felipe Del
Rosario can be stripped of his certificate of attorney.
RULING
Yes. Felipe Del Rosario can be stripped of his certificate of attorney. SC held that the practice of law is not an absolute right to be granted to everyone who demands it but is a privilege to be extended or withheld in the exercise of sound discretion. The standard of the legal profession is not satisfied by conduct which merely enables one to escape the penalties of the criminal law. It would be a disgrace to the judiciary to receive one whose integrity is questionable as an office of the court, to clothe him with all the prestige of its confidence, and then to permit him to hold himself out as a duly authorized member of the bar.
No comments:
Post a Comment