Re: Diosdado Q. Gutierrez 115 Phil.

647

Subject: Requirement of moral fitness is not dispensed with after admission to the bar;
Murder is a crime involving moral turpitude; Case of in re-Lontok not applicable as it
involved absolute pardon

Facts:
Atty. Diosdado Gutierrez, a member of the bar, was convicted of the murder of Filemon
Samaco, former municipal mayor of Calapan, and together with his co-conspirators, was
sentence to the penalty of death.

The court, upon review, reduced the penalty to reclusion perpetua. After servicing a
portion of the sentence, he was granted a conditional pardon by the President on August
1958 on the condition that he shall not again violate any of the penal laws of the
Philippines.

The widow of the deceased Samaco filed a verified complaint before the Court praying
that Atty. Gutierrez be disbarred pursuant to Rule 127, section 5. Atty. Gutierrez admitted
the facts but pleaded the conditional pardon in defense.

Held:

Requirement of moral fitness is not dispensed with after admission to the bar
1. For the admission of a candidate to the bar, the Rules of Court not only prescribe a test
of academic preparation but require satisfactory testimonials of good moral character.
These standards are neither dispensed with nor lowered after admission; the lawyer must
continue to adhere to them or else incur the risk of suspension or removal.

Murder is a crime involving moral turpitude

2. Under section 5 of Rule 127 a member of the bar may be removed or suspended from
his office as attorney by the Supreme Court by reason of his conviction of a crime involving
moral turpitude.

3. Moral turpitude includes everything which is done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty
or good morals. As used in disbarment statutes, it means an 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.
Considering these definitions, Murder is, without doubt, such a crime.

Case of In re Lontok not applicable as it involved absolute pardon

4. In the case of In re Lontok (43 Phil 293), respondent therein was convicted of bigamy
and thereafter pardoned by the Governor-General. It is important to take note that what
was granted in the said case is an absolute pardon.
5. In the present case, the pardon granted to Atty. Gutierrez is not absolute but
conditional, and merely remitted the unexecuted portion of his term. It does not reach
the offense itself, unlike in cases when a full pardon and amnesty are extended. The
court therefore ordered the disbarment of Atty. Gutierrez.