DUTY OF A LAWYER EMPLOYED IN THE GOVERNMENT

HEINZ R. HECK, Complainant,vs.
CITY PROSECUTOR CASIANO A. GAMOTIN, JR., Respondent.
A.C. No. 5329; March 18, 2014
BERSAMIN, J.:

FACTS: Heinz Heck filed a complaint for disbarment against the City Prosecutor Casiano
Gamotin of Cagayan de Oro City for  "faulty, highly improper, suspicious anomalous and
unlawful practice” by the respondent. Respondent obstructed justice by delaying cases and
disregarding proper court procedures and displayed favor towards Atty. Adaza, respondent’s
business partners and friends.

Respondent claims that he has no knowledge of the suspension of Atty. Adaza because such
information had not ben disseminated to the public office. Also, he claimed that there were no
irregularities in the filing and resolution of the motion for reconsideration of Atty. Adaza, in a
different case. Respondent also asserts that he did not display any act of violence, particularly the
kicking of the chairs and slamming of the door.

ISSUE: Whether or not the respondent breached any canon on professional conduct or legal
ethics.

RULING: The SC ruled that the complaint should be dismissed for failure to prove the charges
filed. The evidence adduced by the complainant insufficient to warrant the disbarment of the
respondent. The power to disbar, being the most severe form of disciplinary action, must be
exercised with caution. It must be exercised only for the most imperative reasons and in cases of
clear misconduct affecting the standing and moral character of the lawyer as an officer of the
court and member of the bar. Indeed, every lawyer who is administratively charged is presumed
innocent of wrongdoing. Thus, the court also believes that the respondent was not yet aware of
the suspension at that time.

WHEREFORE, the Court DISMISSES the complaint for disbarment against respondent
ATTY. CASIANO A. GAMOTIN, JR.; and CONSIDERS this administrative matter closed and
terminated.