0% found this document useful (0 votes)
391 views1 page

LegProf - Romulo Villa Vs Junel Anthony Ama, Et Al, BM 674 (June 14, 2005)

Junel Ama was a member of a fraternity implicated in the death of Lenny Villa in 1992. Despite passing the bar, Junel was not allowed to practice law due to his conviction for homicide through conspiracy. The Court of Appeals later set aside his conviction, finding him only liable for physical injuries and sentencing him to 20 days in prison. The Supreme Court then admitted Junel to the practice of law, reasoning that the crime he was convicted of, slight physical injuries, was a light offense that did not involve moral turpitude or cruelty.

Uploaded by

Lu Cas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
391 views1 page

LegProf - Romulo Villa Vs Junel Anthony Ama, Et Al, BM 674 (June 14, 2005)

Junel Ama was a member of a fraternity implicated in the death of Lenny Villa in 1992. Despite passing the bar, Junel was not allowed to practice law due to his conviction for homicide through conspiracy. The Court of Appeals later set aside his conviction, finding him only liable for physical injuries and sentencing him to 20 days in prison. The Supreme Court then admitted Junel to the practice of law, reasoning that the crime he was convicted of, slight physical injuries, was a light offense that did not involve moral turpitude or cruelty.

Uploaded by

Lu Cas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

LegProf - Romulo Villa Vs Junel Anthony Ama, et al, BM 674 (June 14, 2005)

Junel Ama, was one of the members of Aquila Legis Fraternity implicated and charged for the death of
“Lenny” Villa. Despite passing the bar in 1992, Junel was not allowed to take his lawyer’s oath. He later
petitioned to be admitted to the Bar when his conviction for homicide through conspiracy was set aside
by the Court of Appeals finding him only liable for physical injuries and sentencing him to 20-days
imprisonment. Supreme Court admitted him into the practice of law reasoning that the crime for which
he was convicted was only slight physical injuries, a light offense which cannot be considered a grave
violation of the moral sentiment of the community or done in the spirit of cruelty, hostility or revenge
– a crime certainly not involving moral turpitude.

You might also like