Francis Bhrill C.

Nuez
Criminal Law 2
Judge Benjamin Pozon
LCL 122 1-A-2
S.Y. 2019-2020
Second Semester

ENRIQUE JAVIER DE ZUZUARREGUI vs ANTHONY DE ZUZUARREGUI

B.M. No. 2796
February 11, 2020

FACTS:

The case started when the Petitioner filed a complaint before the Office of the
Bar Confidant (OBC) questioning the moral character of his nephew, the respondent,
who is an applicant for the 2013 Bar Examination given that the former filed four
criminal charges against the latter. On the respondents Petition to Take the 2013 Bar
Examination (Petition) he disclosed four criminal charges against him.

The court provisionally allowed the respondent to take the exam under certain
conditions. The respondent was able to pass the bar examination and consequently
filed a Verified Petition to Take the Lawyers Oath claiming that the pending criminal
cases against him was already dismissed.

However, the court required the respondent to explain why he failed to disclose one of
the cases filed by the petitioner in his Petition and submit necessary requirements to
prove the dismissal of the criminal charges against him.

The respondent filed a Verified Compliance stating that he failed to disclose the said
criminal charge against him because he has no knowledge of such action against him
when he filed his Petition.

The respondent was asked again to submit necessary documents to prove his claim that
the charges against him was already dismissed. Thus, resulting to the submission of his
second Verified Compliance.

The OBC however recommended that his Petition to Take the Lawyers Oath be held in
abeyance in view of the other criminal charges against him that was still pending before
the Office of the City Prosecutor of Quezon City.

Three years have passed, he filed his Second Verified Motion praying that he be allowed
to take the Lawyers Oath and Sign the Roll of Attorneys claiming the dismissal of all the
criminal charges against him. He also stated that he may have already cleared all the
charges against him, he feared that a new round of fabricated charges against him to
prevent him from becoming a full-fledged lawyer.

The OBC granted his motion and allowed him to take the Lawyer’s Oath and Sign in the
Roll of Attorneys.

However, before the respondent could take the Oath the OBC received a letter from the
from the petitioner questioning the moral integrity, honesty and uprightness of the
respondent given that there is 10 pending cases against him. The court decided to
suspend the scheduled Oath-Taking until the Supreme Court En Banc has decided on
the matter.
The respondent on his letter to the Chief Justice stated that 9 out of the 10 cases
against him was already dismissed for lack of probable cause and that pending case
against him was timely instituted to prevent him from taking the oath and signing the
roll, the last two steps before becoming a full-fledged lawyer. That the cases against
him was a mere harassment designed to prevent him from becoming a full-fledged
lawyer.

Issue:
Whether or not the respondent may be allowed to take the Lawyer’s Oath and
Sign in the Roll of Attorneys despite the pending charge against him.

Held:
Yes, the court ruled that the respondent’s admission to the Philippine Bar has
long been held in abeyance due to the criminal cases pending against him before the
Office of the City Prosecutors of Quezon City. The court also stated according to the
Rollo, all of the criminal charges against him was already dismissed except for the most
recent one, to which the timing of the filing of the case is highly suspect.

The dismissal of all the criminal charges against the respondent coupled with the
various certificates of good moral character in his favor, is sufficient for the Court to
conclude that respondent possesses the moral qualifications required of lawyers.