Zeta vs Malinao

[A.M. No. P-220. December 20, 1978.] JULIO ZETA, complainant, vs. FELICISIMO MALINAO, respondent. Felicisimo Malinao, court interpreter and respondent FACTS Apart from appearing as counsel in various municipal courts without prior permission of his superiors in violation of civil service rules and regulations, respondent court interpreter also falsified his time records by making it appear therein that he was present in his office on occasions when in fact he was in the municipal court appearing as counsel, without being a member of the bar, which furthermore, constitutes illegal practice of law. The investigating judge recommended the reprimand of respondent. The Supreme Court dismissed the respondent from his position as court interpreter. DETAILED FACTS SYLLABUS 1. PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES; COURT INTERPRETER; APPEARING IN COURT AS COUNSEL. — The appearance as counsel in various municipal courts by a court interpreter, without prior permission of his superiors in violation of civil service rules and regulations, and the falsification of his daily time record to make it appear therein that he was present in his office when in fact he was not, are grave offenses which warrant his separation from the service. 2. ATTORNEYS; PRACTICE; ONLY MEMBERS OF THE BAR ALLOWED TO PRACTICE LAW. — The fact that respondent court interpreter appeared a number of times as counsel indicates that he was doing it as a regular practice obviously for considerations other than pure love of justice; and his appearance as counsel, without being a member

DECISION

BARREDO, J p: 1. Felicisiomo Malinao , Court interpreter was charged with, illegally appearing in court, grave misconduct in office, falsification, and violation of civil service 2. It was alleged that Mr. Malinao appeared in the municipal court of his town , in Zumarraga, Talalora and Sta Rita as an attorney when he is not an attorney

3. It was alleged that he instigated persons telling them to commit crimes and tells them not to be afraid since he has influence over judges. 4. he is unfaithfully filing his time record. Even when he has been out practicing in the municipal courts, he would fill his time record as present. He receives salary for those absent days. 5. It was also alleged that he violated civil service law which prohibited a civil service employee to engage in private practice any profession or business without permission from the Department Head. ISSUE: IS THE RESPONDENT AS COURT INTERPRETER ALLOWED TO PRACTICE LAW? HELD NO. Only members of the bar are allowed to practice law. The fact that respondent court interpreter appeared a number of times as counsel indicates that he was doing it as a regular practice obviously for considerations other than pure love of justice; and his appearance as counsel, without being a member The appearance as counsel in various municipal courts by a court interpreter, without prior permission of his superiors in violation of civil service rules and regulations, and the falsification of his daily time record to make it appear therein that he was present in his office when in fact he was not, are grave offenses which warrant his separation from the service. Respondent Felicisimo Malinao is dismissed from his position as interpreter in the Court of First Instance, CFI, Zumarraga, Western Samar, with prejudice to reemployment in the judicial branch of the government.