This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-02-03 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| The IBP-CBD ruled that conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude is a ground for disbarment or suspension. Citing International Rice Research Institute v. National Labor Relations Commission,[1] the IBP-CBD further ruled that homicide may or may not involve moral turpitude depending on the degree of the crime. The IBP-CBD reviewed the decision of this Court convicting Sesbreño for the crime of homicide, and found that the circumstances leading to the death of the victim involved moral turpitude. The IBP-CBD stated: Neither victim Luciano Amparado nor his companion Christopher Yapchangco was shown to be a foe of respondent and neither had the victim Luciano nor his companion Christopher shown to have wronged the respondent. They simply happened to be at the wrong place and time the early morning of June 3, 1993. | |||||
|
2009-04-28 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| Criticisms of moral turpitude as an inexactly defined concept are not unwarranted. First, the current definition of the term is broad. It can be stretched to include most kinds of wrongs in society -- a result that the Legislature could not have intended. This Court itself concluded in IRRI v. NLRC[29] that moral turpitude "is somewhat a vague and indefinite term, the meaning of which must be left to the process of judicial inclusion or exclusion as the cases are reached" - once again confirming, as late as 1993 in IRRI, our case-by-case approach in determining the crimes involving moral turpitude. | |||||
|
2008-08-06 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| The instant Petition originated from a Petition for Reconstitution[19] of OCT No. 239 filed by the Spouses Layos on 12 August 1993 with the San Pedro RTC, docketed as LRC Case No. B-1784. It is noted that the Spouses Layos instituted this reconstitution case on the same day as their quieting of title case before the Biñan RTC. | |||||