In re: Disbarment proceedings against Atty. Diosdado Q. Gutierrez | AM No.

L-363 | July 31, 1962 | Ponente:

J. Makalintal

Nature of Case: Canon 1. Promote and Respect Law and Legal Process
Respondent: Atty. Diosdado Q. Gutierrez

SUMMARY: Respondent Gutierrez is a member of the Philipine bar who has been convicted of murder. The victim’s
widow pray that respondent be disbarred in accordance with Rule 127 section 5. Respondent relies on Lontok case
which held that pardon from the President bars the proceeding of his disbarment. However, in this case, only
conditional pardon was given, therefore, Lontok case is inapplicable. Court held that pursuant to Rule 127 Sec 5 and
the nature of the crime, Gutierrez is ordered disbarred.
DOCTRINE: Rule 127 Section 5 Rules of Court

FACTS:
 Respondent is a member of the Philippine Bar (admitted Oct 5, 1945);
o convicted of the murder of Filemon Samaco, former mayor of Calapan (Jun 30 1956);
o sentenced to death, which was later on changed to reclusion perpetua;
o granted conditional pardon by the President (Aug 19 1958) wherein unexecuted portion of
the prison term was remitted "on condition that he shall not again violate any of the penal
laws of the Philippine
 Oct 9 1958 Samaco’s widow filed verified complaint to the Court praying that respondent be removed from
the roll of lawyers pursuant to Rule 127, section 5.
o Sec 5 Rule 127: a member of the bar may be removed suspended from his office as attorney
by the Supreme Court by reason of his conviction of a crime insolving moral turpitude.
o Moral turpitude
- everything which is done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals;
- act of baseness, vileness, or depravity in the private and social duties which a man owes to
his fellowmen or to society in general, contrary to the accepted rule of right and duty
between man and man.
 In his answer, Gutierrez admitted to the facts alleged by complainant

ISSUE + RULING:
1. W/N the conditional pardon extended to respondent places him beyond the scope of the rule on disbarment
aforecited.? NO.
o Gutierrez depended on the Lontok case wherein the respondent was convicted of bigamy and later
pardoned by Governor-General and the Court decided that “a pardon operates to wipe out the
conviction and is a bar to any proceeding for the disbarment of the attorney after the pardon has
been granted."
o Since the pardon granted to Gutierrez is not absolute but conditional. And merely remitted the
unexecuted portion of his term, it does not reach the offense itself. Lontok is therefore inapplicable
in this case.
o Respondent Gutierrez must be judged upon the fact of his conviction for murder without regard to
the pardon he invokes in defense. The crime was qualified by treachery and aggravated by its having
been committed in hand, by taking advantage of his official position (respondent being municipal
mayor at the time) and with the use of motor vehicle. The degree of moral turpitude involved is such
as to justify his being purged from the profession.
o The practice of law is a privilege accorded only to those who measure up to certain rigid standards of
mental and moral fitness.

FINAL RULING: Gutierrez is ordered disbarred and his name stricken from the roll of lawyers.