G.R. No. L-41414, October 11, 1933
JOSE TOPACIO NUENO, complainant, vs. PASCUAL SANTOS, respondent.

FACTS

Respondent Atty. Pascual Santos, a member of the Manila Municipal Board, was administratively charged. An investigation by Judge Anacleto Diaz, stemming from a complaint about prohibited games, led to a recommendation for Santos’s removal from the board and for Supreme Court action regarding a violation of his lawyer’s oath. The specific charge for disbarment proceedings was that Santos, as counsel for Iñigo Hernandez in a criminal case for permitting a game of “monte,” entered a plea of guilty despite knowing Hernandez was merely a waiter and did not commit the offense. The case was referred to the Attorney-General (Solicitor-General) for investigation.

ISSUE

Whether Atty. Pascual Santos should be disciplined for violating his lawyer’s oath by consenting to a falsehood and deceiving the court.

RULING

Yes. The Court found that Santos consented to a falsehood and deceived the court by having his client plead guilty to an offense he did not commit, in clear violation of his oath. Mitigating circumstances were considered, including that the charge was limited to one case, political motivations were involved, and the incident occurred two years prior. Instead of disbarment or a one-year suspension, the Court imposed a three-month suspension from the practice of law effective October 16, 1933.

AI Generated by Armztrong.