12. Marces v.

Arcangel
FACTS: Complainant is a 61y.o. retiree, married to one Ruth Jovellar and has 5 children. Spouses Wilfredo and
Flordeliza Cañas moved into complainant’s neighborhood. A domestic helper of Cañases sought help for alleged
maltreatment she received from her employers. Complainant, who was then the incumbent Purok Leader,
referred the matter to barangay authorities. The dispute was resolved but the relation of Marces and Cañases
became strained. One time, Mrs. Cañas had an exchange of words with Mrs. Marces and the latter’s daughter,
during which they hurled invectives at each other. It was triggered by a fight between the turkeys of the family.
The following day, Mrs. Cañas, with her sister and a neighbor, boarded a passenger jeepney despite the fact
that there were no more seats available because complainant was riding that vehicle. Mrs. Cañas intended to
cause the complainant’s arrest because as the jeepney neared the police station, Cañas asked the driver to stop
the vehicle. She got off and called a policeman and had the complainant Ben D. Marces arrested. The arrest was
made in the basis of alias warrants handed to the police by Mrs. Cañas. The warrants were issued by MTCC
Judge Edipolo Sarabia in 3 criminal cases against herein complainant for violations of BP 22. Complainant was
detained for one night without knowledge of his family. Complainant saw Judge Sarabia and explained that the
cases against him had long been amicably settled. The judge told him that he did not really know anything about
the cases and that he had only been requested by respondent Judge Paul Arcangel to issue the warrants. Cañas
filed a case against complainant in the Barangay. Mediation conferences were conducted between the two
families. Although he had not been asked to, respondent Judge Arcangel attended the conferences. walked in
and out of the hall, introduced himself as the executive Judge of RTC Davao in an attempt to influence the
barangay officials accompanied Mrs. Cañas and acted as the baby sitter of the latter’s daughter. The barangay
officials failed to amicably settle the dispute. The feud between the families worsened. A violent confrontation
happened and as a result of which, parties were injured. Armed men in uniform arrived in two military vehicles
and arrested the members of complainant’s family. The arrests were made on orders of certain Col. Nelson
Estares. The investigating officer found probable cause and filed charges of attempted murder against
complainant, his wife and son. Complainant alleges that respondent Judge took advantage of his position and
influenced the conduct of the preliminary investigation. At the time of applications for bail bond were being
being made, the respondent judge arrived and questioned the validity of the bond posted. Because of these
events, complainant questioned the interest of the Judge in the dispute between the 2 families. COMMENT of
respondent judge: charges are false, malicious and utterly baseless, the same were filed merely to gratify
complainant’s personal spite and animosity against him, complaint was filed in anticipation of the cases which
the respondent intends to file against the complainant for slander and threats.
ISSUE: WON the respondent Judge is guilty of impropriety therefore violating the Code of Judicial Conduct—
YES.

RULING: Yes. The judge is guilty of improper conduct to be fully supported by the evidence in the record.
HOWEVER, the report of the investigating Justice fails to consider other serious allegations in the complaint of
which there is also sufficient evidence in the record, to wit:
1.) caused the issuance of alias warrants of arrest by requesting another judge, before whom the case
against the complainant was pending
2.) Arrest would have not been made without the intervention of respondent judge.
These charges were actually admitted by respondent judge. The criminal cases against complainants have been
in archive since 1983. Its discovery and revival was made possible upon the request for verification and its status
and information by Judge Arcangel. Respondent justifies his intervention on the ground that complainant
Marces has been able to evade service of the warrants because of connections with the warrant officers of
Davao City. Even if this had been the case, it would not excuse respondent judge in using his own influence.
Clearly, respondent intervened in the feud between the two families and such interference was not limited to
the barangay mediation proceedings but extended to various stages of the conflict. The Court finds the
actuations of the respondent judge improper and censurable.
He should not suffer his conduct to create the impression that any person can unduly influence him or enjoy his
favor.
Penalty: REPRIMAND with WARNING
The court believes that dismissal from service is an excessive penalty. They took into consideration the following
- no other charge against respondent Judge
- first administrative case
- record as a judge is exemplary
Violated NCJC Canon 4, SEC. 8. Judges shall not use or lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance their private
interests, or those of a member of their family or of anyone else, nor shall they convey or permit others to convey the
impression that anyone is in a special position improperly to influence them in the performance of judicial duties.