Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, for committing an act of impropriety, respondent Judge Mateo M. Leanda, now retired, is hereby ordered to pay a FINE of P10,000.00, the same to be deducted from whatever retirement benefits are due him. SO ORDERED.
Accordingly, this Court must wield its disciplinary power. However, this Court finds that the amount of fine recommended, i.e., equivalent to respondents two months salary is somewhat excessive. Besides, this is the first and only time that respondent judge, now retired, was ever administratively charged. The amount of P10,000.00 as fine to be imposed on the respondent is more appropriate given the circumstances of this case. WHEREFORE, for committing an act of impropriety, respondent Judge Mateo M. Leanda, now retired, is hereby ordered to pay a FINE of P10,000.00, the same to be deducted from whatever retirement benefits are due him. SO ORDERED.
A.M. NO. RTJ-03-1780 (FORMERLY OCA IPI NO. 03-1709-RTJ) - AMADO L. DE LEON, COMPLAINANT, VS. JUDGE PATROCINIO R. CORPUZ, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 44, SAN FERNANDO CITY, PAMPANGA.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
A.M. NO. RTJ-03-1780
CaseA.M. No. MTJ-00-1296 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 98-548-MTJ) - ALBERT R. SORDAN, COMPLAINANT, VS. JUDGE ROLANDO B. DE GUZMAN OF THE METC-BR. 2, MANILA.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
A.M. No. MTJ-00-1296
CaseA.M. No. RTJ-12-2333 [Formerly OCA-I.P.I. No. 11-3721-RTJ] - PROSECUTORS HYDIERABAD A. CASAR, JONALD E. HERNANDEZ, DANTE P. SINDAC AND ATTY. JOBERT D. REYES, COMPLAINANTS, VS. CORAZON D. SOLUREN, PRESIDING JUDGE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 96, BALER, AURORA.R E S O L U T I O N - Supreme Court E-Lib
A.M. No. RTJ-12-2333