A.C. No. 9401, October 22, 2013
JOCELYN DE LEON v. ATTY.
TYRONE PEDRENA
Facts:
Pe"re#a, a Public
Attorney of Parañaque City. Joce$
! De
Leo! is a single mother of two minor children.
Atty. Pedreña is the counsel of Jocelyn De Leon
on the
case for support for the two minor
children.
ecords
show,
as
established
by
the
!"P
!n#estigating Commissioner, on January $%, &%%'
after as(ing about the status of the case Atty.
Pedreña told Jocelyn De Leon then to ride with
him and he would )ust drop Jocelyn by the
)eepney station, she refused to ride with him but
Atty. Pedreña persistently told her to get in the
car, and so she acceded to his request so as not
to o*end him. !nside the car
Pe"re#a
r%bbe" t&e Joce$
!'s r()&t $e) *(t& &(s
&a!"+ tr(e" to (!sert &(s
!)er (!to
&er
r-$
c$ose" &a!"+ )rabbe" &er
&a!" a!" orc(b$
/$ace" (t o! &(s crotc& area+ a!"
/resse" &(s
!)er a)a(!st &er /r( ate
/art. Jocelyn
thereafter tried at all cost to unloc( the car+s door
and told him categorically that she was getting
o* the car. !nstead he accelerated a bit more but
sensing her insistence to get o*, he stopped the
car, and allowed her to get o*.
of the Philippines a complaint for
disbarment or suspension from the practice oflaw
against Atty. /yrone Pedreña.
!"P !n#estigating Commissioner recommended for
his disbarment, the !"P "oard of 0o#ernors
howe#er
the penalty to three1month
suspension from practice of law. 2pon 3otion for
econsideration by Atty. Pedreña which the
"oard denied, they increased the penalty to si4
months.
/hereafter transmitted records and resolution to the
Court for appro#al.
ss%e: 5hether or not Atty. Pedreña is guilty of
#iolating
ule 6.%6 of Canon 6 of the Code
ofProfessional
esponsibility.
R%$(!): 7es, Atty. Pedreña is guilty. /he 8upreme
!n#estigating Commissioner. 7et, the Court
consider the recommended penalty of suspension
for si4 months not commensurate with the gra#ity
of the o*ensi#e acts committed.
0i#en the circumstances in which Atty. Pedreña
committed them, his acts were not merely
o*ensi#e
and
undesirable
but
repulsi#e,
disgraceful and grossly immoral. !n this regard, it
bears stressing that (--ora$ co!"%ct (s )ross
*&e! (t (s so corr%/t as to co!st(t%te
a cr(-(!a$ act, or so %!/r(!c(/$e" as
to be re/re&e!s(b$e to a &()& "e)ree,
or *&e! co--(tte"
%!"er
s%c&
sca!"a$o%s
or re o$t(!)
c(rc%sta!ces
as
to
s&oc
t&e co-%!(t
's se!se o "ece!c
.
/herefore, the Court too( into consideration
)udicial precedents on gross immoral conduct
bearing on se4ual matters. /he Court consider the
acts committed by Atty. Pedreña to be not of
cases whereby the respondent lawyer was
disbarred
for
ra/(!)
&(s
!e()&bor's
*( e. 2nli(e in Barrientos where there was
"ece(t and in Delos Reyes where there were
t&reats a!" ta (!) a" a!ta)e o
a
$a*
er's /os(t(o!, Atty. Pedreña did not
employ any scheme to satiate his lust, but,
instead, he desisted upon the
to his ad#ances.
!n #iew of these considerations, according to the
Court penalty of s%s/e!s(o!
rot&e
/ract(ce o $a* or t*o
ears is
tting
and )ust.
A.C. No. 9401, October 22, 2013
JOCELYN
DE
LEON
v ATTY.
TYRONE PEDRENA
Facts:
Pe"re#a, a Public
Attorney of Parañaque City. Joce$
! De
Leo! is a single mother of two minor children.
Atty. Pedreña is the counsel of Jocelyn De Leon
on the
case for support for the two minor
children.
ecords show, as established by the !"P
!n#estigating Commissioner, on January $%, &%%'
after as(ing about the status of the case Atty.
Pedreña told Jocelyn De Leon then to ride with
him and he would )ust drop Jocelyn by the
)eepney station, she refused to ride with him but
Atty. Pedreña persistently told her to get in the
car, and so she acceded to his request so as not
to o*end him. !nside the car
Pe"re#a
r%bbe" t&e
t $e) *(t& &(s
&a!"+ tr(e" to (!sert &(s
!)er (! to
&er r-$
c$ose" &a!"+ )rabbe" &er
&a!" a!" orc(b$
/$ace" (t o! &(s crotc& area+ a!" /resse"
&(s
!)er a)a(!st &er /r( ate
/art. Jocelyn thereafter tried at all cost to unloc(
the car+s door and told him categorically that
she was getting o* the car. !nstead he
accelerated a bit more but sensing her
insistence to get o*, he stopped the car, and
allowed her to get o*.
of the Philippines a complaint
for
disbarment or suspension from the practice oflaw
against Atty. /yrone Pedreña.
!"P !n#estigating Commissioner recommended for
his disbarment, the !"P "oard of 0o#ernors
the penalty to three1month
suspension from practice of law. 2pon 3otion for
econsideration by Atty. Pedreña which the
"oard denied, they increased the penalty to si4
months.
/hereafter transmitted records and resolution to the
Court for appro#al.
ss%e: 5hether or not Atty. Pedreña is guilty of#iolating
ule 6.%6 of Canon 6 of the Code
of Professional
esponsibility.
R%$(!): 7es, Atty. Pedreña is guilty. /he 8upreme
!n#estigating Commissioner. 7et, the Court
consider the recommended penalty of suspension
for si4 months not commensurate with the gra#ity
of the o*ensi#e acts committed.
0i#en the circumstances in which Atty. Pedreña
committed th
h s acts ere not mere y
bears stressing that (--ora$ co!"%ct (s
)ross
*&e! (t (s so corr%/t as to co!st(t%te
a cr(-(!a$ act, or so %!/r(!c(/$e" as
to
re/re&e!s(b$e
to committed
a &()& "e)ree,
the be
same
degree
as the acts
the
or
*&e!
co--(tte"
%!"er by s%c&
respondent
lawyer
in
Calub
v.
Suller
, among
other
sca!"a$o%s
or re o$t(!)
c(rc%sta!ces
as
to
s&oc
t&e co-%!(t
's se!se o "ece!c
.
/herefore, the Court too( into consideration
)udicial precedents on gross immoral conduct
bearing on se4ual matters. /he Court consider the
acts committed by Atty. Pedreña to be not of the
same degree as the acts committed by the
respondent lawyer in Calub v. Suller, among other
cases whereby the respondent lawyer was
disbarred
for
ra/(!)
&(s
!e()&bor's
*( e. 2nli(e in Barrientos where there was
"ece(t and in Delos Reyes where there were
t&reats a!" ta (!) a" a!ta)e o
a
committed
them,
his acts were
merelydid not
$a*
er's
/os(t(o!,
Atty. not
Pedreña
o*ensi#e anyand
undesirable
employ
scheme
to satiatebut
his repulsi#e,
lust, but,
instead,
he desisted
upon
the
disgraceful
and grossly
immoral.
!n this regard, it
to his ad#ances.
!n #iew of these considerations, according to the
Court penalty of s%s/e!s(o!
rot&e
/ract(ce o $a* or t*o
ears is
tting
and )ust.