In November 1969, Roscoe Daban was sentenced to death. Atty. Sisto Demaisip was his counsel de parte. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic review. Demaisip was directed to submit an appeal brief. He asked for multiple extensions (13 in total) until in May 1971 when he asked the Supreme Court to be relieved as counsel de parte and be appointed instead as counsel de oficio. He further asked that he be allowed to submit a typewritten appeal brief which he said was already finished. The SC granted his motion but was directed to submit a mimeograph copy of the brief. Meanwhile, Daban escaped prison in June 1971.
Demaisip, instead of submitting a brief, had again submitted four more motions for extension. His final deadline was August 1971 but no appeal brief was submitted.
In October 1971, the SC issued a show-cause order against Demaisip. Demaisip filed a short explanation stating that since Daban escaped, there was no need for an appeal brief anymore.
ISSUE: Whether or not Demaisip should be disciplined.
HELD: Yes. The fact that Daban escaped will not excuse Demaisip from complying with his duties. It is clear that Demaisip, by such gross neglect of duty, notwithstanding the many extensions granted him, was recreant to the trust reposed in him as counsel de oficio. A counsel de oficio has as high a duty to the accused as one employed and paid by accused himself or herself. He must exercise his best efforts and professional ability in behalf of the person assigned to his care. His is to render effective assistance. The accused expects of him due diligence, not mere perfunctory representation. We do not accept the paradox that responsibility is less where the defended party is poor. For, indeed, a lawyer who is a vanguard in the bastion of justice is expected to have a bigger dose of social conscience and a little less of self-interest. Because of this, a lawyer should remain ever conscious of his or her duties to the indigent he or she defends.
Demaisip was suspended from the practice of law except for purposes of filing the appeal brief in this case.
