Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1980 > December 1980 Decisions > A.C. No. 126 December 29, 1980 - IN RE: ATTY. TRANQUILINO ROVERO :




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[A.C. No. 126. December 29, 1980.]

In re: ATTY. TRANQUILINO ROVERO, Respondent.

SYNOPSIS


The Supreme Court, upon finding that respondent lawyer had been convicted of smuggling and sentenced to pay a fine by a competent court, ordered his disbarment and the surrender of his lawyer’s certificate. His first and second petitions for reinstatement to the bar were both denied. In this third plea, respondent, now 71 years old, humbly and earnestly implored the Court to be reinstated in the roll of attorneys. He submitted testimonials showing the high esteem accorded him in the community to which he belonged. His exemplary conduct merited the approval of President Magsaysay who granted him absolute and unconditional pardon for the crime he had committed.

The Supreme Court found respondent to have demonstrated his moral rehabilitation and reformations to be fit, once more, to engage in the practice of law, after having been sufficiently punished and disciplined for more than 28 years, and ordered his reinstatement.


SYLLABUS


1. LEGAL ETHICS; DISBARMENT; REINSTATEMENT TO PRACTICE OF LAW; GOOD MORAL CHARACTER, A REQUIREMENT. — To be reinstated to the practice of law, it is necessary that the respondent must, like any other candidate for admission to the bar, satisfy the Court that he is a person of good moral character — a fit and proper person to practice law.

2. ID.; CONVICTION OF CRIME AS A GROUND THEREFORE; EFFECT OF ABSOLUTE PARDON OF CRIME ON DISBARMENT PROCEEDING. — An absolute pardon not only blots out the crime committed, but removes all disabilities resulting from the conviction. In the case of In re Marcelino Lontok (43 Phil. 293; See also: In re Atty. Saturnino Parcasio, Adm Case. No. 1000, Feb. 18, 1976, 69 SCRA 336 , and In re Gregorio D. Yaranon, SBC No. 629, March 18, 1980), the Court, in dismissing the disbarment proceeding against the respondent therein, who had been convicted of bigamy, a crime involving moral turpitude, upon the ground that the respondent had been granted plenary pardon for his crime, applied the rule that" a pardon reaches both the punishment for the offense and the guilt of the offender; and when the pardon is full, it releases the punishment and blots out of existence the guilt, so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the crime," and, "if granted before conviction, it prevents any of the penalties and disabilities, and restores him to all his civil rights; it makes him, as it were, a new man and gives him a new credit and capacity."


D E C I S I O N


CONCEPCION, JR., J.:


Petition of respondent Tranquilino Rovero for reinstatement in the Roll of Attorneys.cralawnad

The record shows that on October 24, 1952, the Court, upon a finding that the respondent Tranquilino Rovero had been found guilty by a competent court of a violation of Section 2703 of the Revised Administrative Code, as amended, (Smuggling) and sentenced to pay a fine of P2,500.00, ordered his disbarment and the surrender of the lawyer’s certificate issued to him. 1 Almost four (4) years thereafter, or on July 7, 1956, the said respondent filed a petition for reinstatement, claiming, among others, that his disbarment had caused him untold misery and mental anguish, and that he had been granted an absolute and unconditional pardon for his crime and restored to full civil and political rights, and pledged, "on bended knees", "not to commit the same or similar mistake in the future nor to involve himself further in any transaction which might tend to drag down his name as lawyer and as an ordinary dignified citizen." 2 The Court, however, denied his petition. 3

Not one to be disheartened, on March 10, 1958, the respondent Tranquilino Rovero again implored the Court to be readmitted to the practice of law, 4 but the Court turned a deaf ear to his plea. 5

Once more, the respondent Tranquilino Rovero, "now in his twilight years (71 years old)" asks humbly and earnestly of the Court to be reinstated in the Roll of Attorneys "before crossing the bar to the great beyond." 6

To be reinstated to the practice of law, it is necessary that the respondent must, like any other candidate for admission to the bar, satisfy the Court that he is a person of good moral character — a fit and proper person to practice law. 7

In the instant case, it appears that since his disbarment in 1952, the respondent Tranquilino Rovero has honorably dealt with his citizens. He had demonstrated his moral rehabilitation and reformation as to be fit, once more, to engage in the practice of law. Mr. Rovero has been active in several civic and educational organizations. He was appointed the secretary of the Provincial Board of Aklan when that province was organized. He had also been the duly accredited delegate of the Aklan Chapter of the Philippine National Red Cross to its Aklan Chapter of the Philippine National Red Cross to its Second Biennial National Convention held in Manila on August 23 to 26, 1957. 8 He was president of the Quezon City Central Lions Club which he helped organize, 9 and for a time, he was president of the Board of Trustees of the Northwestern Visayan Colleges in Kalibo, Aklan. 10

Mr. Rovero has also held high positions of trust in commercial establishments. He had been elected the president of the Filipino Industrial Corporation; the vice-president of the Meteor Company, Inc., and the president of the Rural Bank of Hermosa (Bataan), a position which he holds up to the present. 11

Testimonials have been presented regarding the high esteem accorded him in the community to which he belongs. 12 His good conduct is certified to by the president of the Aklan Bar Association 13 and the parish priest of Christ the King Church who stated that Mr. Rovero "is a devoted parishioner who always gets voluntarily involved in the various charitable activities of the parish," and "is cooperative and responsible and gets along fine with his fellow parishioners." 14 His conduct has also merited the approval of the late Pres. Ramon Magsaysay who granted him an absolute and unconditional pardon for his crime. 15

An absolute pardon not only blots out the crime committed, but removes all disabilities resulting from the conviction. In the case of In re Marcelino Lontok, 16 the Court, in dismissing the disbarment proceeding against the respondent therein, who had been convicted of bigamy, a crime involving moral turpitude, upon the ground that the respondent had been granted plenary pardon for his crime, applied the rule that a person reaches both the punishment prescribed for the offense and the guilt of the offender; and when the pardon is full, it releases the punishment and blots out of existence the guilt, so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the crime," and, "if granted before conviction, it prevents any of the penalties and disabilities, and restores him to all his civil rights; it makes him, as it were, a new man and gives him a new credit and capacity."cralaw virtua1aw library

Under the circumstances, and considering that more than 28 years had already passed since he was disbarred, the respondent Tranquilino Rovero has been sufficiently punished and disciplined. 17

WHEREFORE, the order of disbarment is lifted and Attorney Tranquilino Rovero is hereby reinstated in the legal profession and restored to the practice of law. The Clerk of Court is directed to return to him his lawyer’s diploma, his certificate of admission to the Bar, and any other certificate issued to him relative to his admission to the Bar.chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library

Barredo, Makasiar, Aquino, Fernandez, Guerrero, Abad Santos, De Castro and Melencio-Herrera, JJ., concur.

Fernando, C.J., in the result.

Teehankee J., in the result.

Endnotes:



1. Rollo. p. 32, also 92 Phil. 128.

2. Id., p. 48.

3. Id., p. 53.

4. Id., p. 57.

5. Id., p. 67.

6. Id., p. 68.

7. Cui v. Cui, 120 Phil. 725.

8. Rollo, p. 63.

9. Id., p. 71.

10. Id., p. 64.

11. Id., p. 69.

12. Id., pp. 61, 64, 65.

13. Id., p. 66.

14. Id., p. 75.

15. Id., pp. 52, 70.

16. 43 Phil. 293; See also: In re Atty. Saturnino Parcasio, Adm. Case No. 1000, Feb. 18, 1976, 69 SCRA 336, and In re Gregorio D. Yaranon, SBC No. 629 March 18, 1980.

17. Royo v. Oliva, 107 Phil. 313.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






December-1980 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 72553 December 2, 1980 - FELICITO R. QUIMPO v. TANODBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-39742 December 2, 1980 - AIR MANILA, INC. v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

  • G.R. No. L-27733 December 3, 1980 - RENATO RAYMUNDO v. ALBERTO R. DE JOYA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-30686 December 3, 1980 - MARIANO UMALI v. FLORO CAPLI CRUZ

  • G.R. No. L-38840 December 3, 1980 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PIO B. FERANDOS

  • G.R. Nos. L-44493-94 December 3, 1980 - DIATAGON LABOR FEDERATION LOCAL 110 OF THE ULGWP v. BLAS F. OPLE

  • G.R. Nos. L-26944-45 December 5, 1980 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ELADIO GALVEZ, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. OCA-112 December 19, 1980 - IN RE: JUDGE JOSE G. PAULIN

  • A.M. No. 1867 December 19, 1980 - NATIONAL MINES AND ALLIED WORKERS UNION v. ROMEO A. REAL

  • AC-1928 December 19, 1980 - IN RE: MARCIAL A. EDILLION

  • G.R. No. L-23494 December 19, 1980 - ALFREDO CATOLICO v. FLORENCIO DEUDOR

  • G.R. No. L-26993 December 19, 1980 - PRESCIOSO EREVE v. LAZARO ESCAROS

  • G.R. No. L-27469 December 19, 1980 - NATIONAL SUGAR WORKERS UNION v. ARSENIO I. MARTINEZ

  • G.R. No. L-28821 December 19, 1980 - LILIA YUSAY GONZALES v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-34057 December 19, 1980 - TROPICAL HOMES, INC. v. DELFIN FLORES

  • G.R. No. L-34532 December 19, 1980 - PASAY LAW AND CONSCIENCE UNION INC. v. PABLO CUNETA

  • G.R. No. L-40150 December 19, 1980 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CESAR OBEDA

  • G.R. No. L-41764 December 19, 1980 - NEW PACIFIC TIMBER & SUPPLY CO. v. ALBERTO V. SENERIS

  • G.R. No. L-41885 December 19, 1980 - NAUTICA SHIPPING AGENCY AND MANAGEMENT CO. v. NATIONAL SEAMEN BOARD

  • G.R. No. L-45517 December 19, 1980 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HERMINIGILDO MUÑOZ

  • G.R. No. L-47188 December 19, 1980 - VICTOR NATOR v. JOSE RAMOLETE

  • G.R. No. L-49654 December 19, 1980 - VIRGILIO V. DIONISIO v. VICENTE PATERNO

  • G.R. No. 50241 December 19, 1980 - PASUDECO WORKERS’ UNION OFFICERS v. BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS

  • G.R. No. 51809 December 19, 1980 - ABRAHAM RAZON v. AMADO G. INCIONG

  • G.R. No. 52789 December 19, 1980 - ROMEO S. GONZALES v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

  • G.R. No. 52806 December 19, 1980 - GREGORIO ARANETA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION v. AMADO G. INCIONG

  • G.R. Nos. 53581-83 December 19, 1980 - MARIANO J. PIMENTEL v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

  • G.R. No. 54247 December 19, 1980 - REYNALDO A. FABULA v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION

  • A.M. No. 100-MJ December 29, 1980 - CANDIDO BULAN v. TEOFILO B. CARDENAS

  • A.C. No. 126 December 29, 1980 - IN RE: ATTY. TRANQUILINO ROVERO

  • A.M. No. P-1343 December 29, 1980 - PABLO GARCIA v. JOSE S. CATBAGAN

  • A.M. No. 2112-CFI December 29, 1980 - JOSE MANGULABNAN v. JOSE TECSON

  • G.R. No. L-23950 December 29, 1980 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. PILAR TANJUATCO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-35007 December 29, 1980 - THE CHIEF OF STAFF, AFP v. TEOFILO GUADIZ, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-40872 December 29, 1980 - MELECIA M. MACABUHAY v. JUAN L. MANUEL

  • G.R. No. L-41144 December 29, 1980 - IGNACIO BUENBRAZO v. GERONIMO R. MARAVE

  • G.R. No. L-43203 December 29, 1980 - JOSE CRISTOBAL v. ALEJANDRO MELCHOR

  • G.R. No. L-44597 December 29, 1980 - CORREA A. AJERO v. EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-46584 December 29, 1980 - NICETAS VDA. DE CASAPAO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.