Jimenez vs. Atty. Felisberto L. Verano, Jr.

AC No. 8108, July 15, 2014

Facts: Brodett and Tecson (“Alabang Boys”) were accused in cases filed by the PDEA for illegal sale and use
of dangerous drugs, but the charges against them were dropped for lack of probable cause. Because of the
failure of the prosecutor to ask clarificatory questions during the evaluation of the case, several media outlets
reported on incidents of bribery and “cover up” allegedly prevalent on investigations of drug trade. This
prompted the House Committee on Illegal Drugs to conduct its own congressional hearings and it was
revealed during one of the hearings that respondent Verano Jr. prepared the release order of his three clients
using the letterhead of the DOJ and the stationery of then Sec. Raul Gonzales.
Jimenez and Vizconde, in their capacity as founders of Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption
(VACC) sent a letter of complaint to CJ Puno. They stated that respondent had admitted to drafting the release
order, hence he committed a highly irregular and unethical act. They argue further that he had no authority to
use the DOJ letterhead and should be penalized for acts unbecoming a member of the bar.
Atty. Lozano also filed a case and anchored his Complaint on respondent’s alleged violation of Canon 1
of the CPR. Atty. Lozano contended that respondent showed disrespect for the law and legal processes in
drafting the said order and sending it to a high-ranking public official, even though he was not a government
prosecutor. Lozano, however, withdrew his Complaint on the ground that a similar action had been filed by
Dante Jimenez.
Respondent reasoned that the Joint Inquest Resolution dropped his clients from the charges against
them, and the said resolution also ordered the immediate release of “Alabang Boys”. He admits that he was
over-zealous, yet if approved by the Sec. of DOJ, then it may be expedited, and since it was not signed then
the draft release order remained “a mere scrap of paper with no effect at all”.
The Investigating Commissioner noted that both complaints were unsubstantiated, while the letter-
complaint of Jimenez and Vizconde had not been verified, hence, no evidence to was adduced to prove the
charges. However, by respondent’s very own admission, the Commissioner found that he indeed acted highly
irregular, hence, guilty of violating Canon 13 of CPR and recommended that he be issued a warning not to
repeat the same or any similar action.
Issue: Whether or not Verano violated the CPR.
Ruling: Yes. He violated Rule 1.02 and 15.07, in relation to Canon 13 of the CPR. A lawyer shall rely
upon the merits of his cause and refrain from any impropriety which tends to influence , or gives the
appearance of influencing the court. During the mandatory hearing conducted by the CBD, respondent stated
that the PDEA refused to release his clients unless it received a direct order from the DOJ Secretary. This
refusal purportedly impelled him to make more serious action by personally approaching the DOJ Secretary
despite the fact that the case was still pending before the latter, and used his influence, stating that he belong
to a political family, as his father is a Congressman and the Secretary was a former one, so they are not
complete stranger to each other. The way respondent conducted himself manifested a clear intent to gain
special treatment and consideration from a government agency. This is precisely the behavior sought to be
regulated by the codified norms for the bar. Respondent is duty-bound to actively avoid anny act that tends to
influence, or may be seen to influence, the outcome of an ongoing case, lest the people’s faith in the judicial
process is diluted. The primary duty of lawyers is not to their clients but to the administration of justice. To that
end, their client’s success is wholly subordinate. Zeal and persistence in advancing a client’s cause must
always be within the bounds of the law. (Suspended for 6 months, and warned for a more severe penalty if
repeated)