1. Melvyn G. Garcia v. Atty. Raul H. Sesbreño ( AC No.

7973)

Facts:

Garcia filed a complaint of disbarment against Atty. Sesbreño in the Office of the Bar
Confidant. Garcia alleged that he married Virginia Alcantara in 1965. The two had children
being Maria Margarita and Angie Ruth. Six (6) years later, in 1971, Sesbreño and Alcantara
separated. He then went to Cabanatuan City to practice dentistry. In 1992, Virginia’s petition
for annulment was granted.

Garcia alleged that in 2005 while he was in Japan, Sesbreño, representing Margarita and
Ruth, filed an action for support against him and his sister, Milagros G. Soliman. The case was
dismissed. In 2007, Garcia returned from Japan. When Sesbreño and Garcia’s children learned
about his return, Sesbreño filed a second amended complaint against him. Garcia alleged that
he learned that Sesbreño was convicted by the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City for homicide in
a criminal case. Garcia alleged that Sesbreño is only on parole. Garcia alleged that homicide is a
crime against moral turpitude. Because of this, Sesbreño should not be allowed to continue his
practice of law. Following this, Sesbreño alleged that on 15 August 2008, Garcia filed a similar
complaint against him before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Commission on Bar
Discipline. Sesbreño alleged that Garcia’s complaint was motivated by resentment and desire
for revenge because he acted as pro bono counsel for Maria Margarita and Angie Ruth.

Issue:

Whether or not conviction for the crime of homicide involves moral turpitude.
Ruling:
 YES. the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Commission on Bar Discipline said that
Sesbreño be disbarred and that his name should be removed from the Roll of Attorneys. A
member of the bar may be disbarred or suspended as attorney by this Court by reason of his
conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude. ( Rules of Court, Rule 138)

2. Stemmerik v. Mas (AC 8010)

Facts:

S​temmerik is a citizen and resident of Denmark. In one of his trips in the Philippines, he
met Atty. Mas. He wanted to buy a real property and consulted Atty. Mas. He was told that he
could legally acquire a real property in the country and suggested a 86 hectare land in Subic,
Zambales. Atty. Mas, as the attorney of Stemmerik bought the property from Bonifacio de
Mesa. The contract to sell provided that De Mesa sold the property to Ailyn Gonzales for 3.8
Million. Then, in another notarized deed made by Atty. Mas, it was stated that Gonzales
received the funds from Stemmerik. In preparing all these documents, Atty. Mas received 400K
fee from Stemmerik. He also gave Atty. Mas the 3.8M purchase price who issued a receipt.
Following this, Atty. Mas became scarce and no longer answered the calls of Stemmerik. When
Stemmerik came back to the Philippines, he availed the services of Fernandez Law Office and
found out the subject property is inalienable, which is located in the former U.S. military
reservation. He was apprised that he cannot own real properties in the country. Meanwhile,
Atty. Mas had already abandoned his office and is unable to be located. Stemmerik filed an
action for disbarment against Atty. Mas before the Commission on Bar Discipline but Atty. Mas
was never to be located.

Issue:

Whether or not Atty. Mas should be disbarred.

Ruling:

YES. Atty. Mas clearly breached his oath as a lawyer and is violating the code of ethics of
his profession as a lawyer. He portrayed both Deceitful and Illegal conduct as representative of
the profession.