BANKING LAWS…

ESTRADA vs. DESIERTO

Facts:

Petition for review on certiorari filed by former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada on 20 December 2002 from the 20 November 2002 resolution of the Court of Appeals dismissing his motion for reconsideration of the resolution of the appellate court dated 29 July 2002.

On 23 January 2001, the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) placed petitioner’s foreign currency deposit account at Citibank Greenhills Branch under constructive distraint.

Contending that the BIR action was unlawful, petitioner filed on 31 January 2001 complaint against respondent BIR officials and respondent Citibank officers before the Office of the Ombudsman for allegedly violating Section 8 of the Foreign Currency Deposits Act (Republic Act No. 6426).

Respondent Lilian B. Hefti, BIR Deputy Commissioner, Officer-In-Charge, issued a notice of distraint to the petitioner in accordance with her function. It further appears that respondent was guided not by her own unilateral and whimsical act and as to her observation regarding the huge disparity of petitioner’s income as declared by him in his Annual Income Tax Return, and the amount of his income as established in the impeachment trial.

Issues:

Whether the Court of Appeals has jurisdiction to entertain original petitions for certiorari from decisions of the Office of the Ombudsman in criminal cases.

Whether respondent Hefti being the Deputy Commissioner of BIR had indeed usurped her duty as she issued the notice of distraint.

Ruling:

Section 8 of R.A. 6426 does not apply to the foreign currency deposit accounts of herein petitioner since the protection under the said law is intended only for depositors who are non-residents (foreign lenders and investors), and are not engaged in trade and business in the Philippines.

Petition is dismissed.

LEGAL & JUDICIAL ETHICS…

In Re: Disbarment Proceedings Against
Atty. Diosdado Q. Gutierrez, respondent.

Facts:

Respondent Diosdado Q. Gutierrez is a member of the Philippine Bar, admitted to it on October 5, 1945. In criminal case of the Court of First Instance of Oriental Mindoro, he was convicted of murder of Filemon Samaco, former municipal mayor of Calapan, and together with his co-conspirators was sentenced to the penalty of death. Upon review by the Court the judgment of conviction was affirmed on June 30, 1956, but the penalty was changed to reclusion perpetua. After serving a portion of the sentence respondent was granted a conditional pardon by the President on August 19, 1958. The unexecuted portion of the prison term was remitted “on condition that he shall not again violate any of the penal laws of the Philippines.”

On October 9, 1958 the widow of the deceased Filemon Samaco filed a verified complaint before this Court praying that respondent be removed from the roll of lawyers pursuant to Rule 127, section 5.

Issues:

Whether the respondent be removed from the roll of lawyers pursuant to Rule 127, section 5.

Whether the conditional pardon extended to respondent places him beyond the scope of the rule on disbarment aforecited.

Ruling:

The pardon granted to respondent is not absolute but conditional, and merely remitted the unexecuted portion of his term. It does not reach the offense itself.
Pursuant to Rule 127, Section 5, and considering the nature of the crime for which respondent Diosdado Q. Gutierrez has been convicted, he is ordered disbarred and his name stricken from the roll of lawyers.