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)