AMV Law Office

15/09/2026

New Hall of Justice at Barangay Mayao Parada coming soon.

14/09/2026

Congratulations to the 2026 Bar Takers!

14/09/2026

11/09/2026

The (SC) has found a bar review coach guilty of indirect contempt for spreading false information about the 2023 Bar Examinations on Facebook after stating that the said exams would be checked by means of artificial intelligence (AI).

In a 𝘗𝘦𝘳 𝘊𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘢𝘮 Decision, the SC 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤 found Edgar S. Dizon, administrator of the Facebook group Bar Law for Dummies, liable for indirect contempt. The Court fined him PHP 30,000 and ordered the removal of his name from the list of 2016 Bar passers.

On September 21, 2023, a post from the Facebook group and the account 𝘛𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘬𝘦𝘯𝘶 𝘋𝘪𝘻𝘰𝘯 claimed that the 2023 Bar Examinations would be “𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘥, 𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘮𝘦𝘢𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 (𝘈𝘐).” It also stated:

“𝘈𝘓𝘞𝘈𝘠𝘚 𝘚𝘛𝘈𝘙𝘛 𝘞𝘐𝘛𝘏 𝘠𝘌𝘚 𝘰𝘳 𝘕𝘖.
𝘠𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘶𝘯𝘢𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘢𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘯 𝘯𝘨 𝘈𝘐 𝘊𝘩𝘦𝘤𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘵 𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘴.”

As a result, the Office of the 2023 Bar Chair (BCO), headed by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando, had to investigate the source of the post and determine its impact on the examinations. It also issued an advisory clarifying that the examinations would be checked by four human examiners for each subject, all of whom are experts in their respective fields.

But instead of removing the post, Dizon threatened to sue the Court and demanded a public apology “within 24 hours”, in a media interview. He also sent several emails to the SC’s Judiciary Public Assistance Section, claiming that the advisory had a chilling effect on him. He denied spreading misinformation and asked the Court to issue a statement correcting the advisory.

After being directed by the SC to explain why he should not be cited for indirect contempt for interfering with the conduct of the 2023 Bar Examinations, Dizon admitted owning the Facebook account but denied claiming that AI would check the examinations, arguing that he used the words “TO HELP” in his post.

The SC was not convinced and held him liable under Rule 71, Section 3 of the 𝘙𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵, which punishes unlawful interference with court processes outside a courtroom, conduct that degrades the courts or undermines public confidence in the administration of justice, and unauthorized practice of law, as indirect contempt.

The SC held that Dizon’s post unlawfully interfered with the conduct of the 2023 Bar Examinations and undermined the integrity of both the exams and the SC, which exercises supervision over the legal profession. It caused confusion and alarm, forcing bar officials to divert their limited time and resources to tracing the source of the post, coordinating with government agencies, issuing clarifications, and responding to numerous inquiries.

The SC further noted Dizon’s lack of remorse. Instead of acknowledging the harm caused by his post, he demanded an apology from the Court, threatened legal action, refused to take down the post, and sought a statement retracting the advisory.

The Court likewise warned Dizon from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law when he conducted bar review coaching sessions and authored several bar review materials used in the 𝘉𝘢𝘳 𝘓𝘢𝘸 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘋𝘶𝘮𝘮𝘪𝘦𝘴 training program. Dizon acknowledged that while he had passed the 2016 Bar Examinations, he had not taken the lawyer’s oath, which is one of the requirements to practice law, because of pending criminal cases.

In his Separate Concurring Opinion, Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen agreed that Dizon must be punished for undermining the integrity of the Bar examinations. However, he also emphasized the need to balance the Court’s power to punish for contempt with the constitutional right to free speech, including legitimate criticism of the courts.

Read the full text of the press release at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=172950

Read the full text of the Decision at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/4734-in-re-social-media-posts-of-edgar-s-dizon/

Read the Separate Concurring Opinion of Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen at https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/4734-separate-concurring-opinion-senior-associate-justice-marvic-m-v-f-leonen/

Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution

14/08/2025

Naglabas ang ng mga inamyendahang alituntunin sa wastong paggamit ng mga terminong “qualified r**e” at “statutory r**e” sa mga kaso na kinasasangkutan ng mga batang biktima. Pinapalawak ng desisyon ang saklaw ng terminong "qualified r**e of a minor" at pinapataas ang pinakamababang danyos na maaaring igawad sa mga biktima.

Inilabas ng En Banc ng Korte Suprema ang mga alintuntunin sa isang Resolusyon na isinulat ng noo’y Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez, na tinanggihan ang motion for reconsideration na inihain ng isang lalaking hinatulan ng panggagahasa sa kanyang walong taong gulang na anak na babae.

Pinagtibay ng Korte Suprema ang nauna nitong Desisyon na hinatulan ang akusadong lalaki na nagkasala ng qualified r**e of a minor. Paglilinaw ng Korte Suprema, angkop ang pagtatalagang ito kapag naroroon ang alinman sa sampung special qualifying aggravating circumstances na nakalista sa ilalim ng Article 266-B ng Revised Penal Code (RPC).

Naunang hinatulan ng Regional Trial Court ang lalaki ng qualified r**e batay sa edad ng biktima at relasyon sa akusado. Pinagtibay ng Court of Appeals ang hatol pero binago ang pagtatalaga ng krimen sa qualified statutory r**e.

Itinama ito ng Korte Suprema na nagdesisyon na ang tamang termino ay qualified r**e of a minor. Pinagkasundo nito ang mga hindi pagkakapare-pareho sa mga nakaraang desisyon.

Naglabas din ito ng mga alituntunin na nagsasaad na kapag mayroong mga elemento ng parehong statutory r**e at qualified r**e, qualified r**e of a minor ang tamang termino.

Nalalapat lang ang mga alituntuning ito sa panggagahasa sa pamamagitan ng pakikipagtalik at hindi sa panggagahasa sa pamamagitan ng sexual assault.

Basahin ang mga alituntunin at press release sa https://tinyurl.com/4t3k2pud.

Basahin ang buong Resolusyon sa https://tinyurl.com/bdedkdr6.

Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-attribution-policy/.

28/11/2024

Iginiit ng Korte Suprema na ang mga kasong child abuse ay maaaari pa ring dinggin kahit na ang batang biktima ay hindi makakapagtestigo sa korte, ayon sa doctrine of unavailable child sa ilalim ng Rule on Examination of a Child Witness.

Sa Desisyon na isinulat ni Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez, pinagtibay ng Second Division ng Korte ang conviction ng akusado para sa qualified r**e dahil sa paggahasa sa kanyang menor de edad na anak.

Kwinestiyon ng isang ama ang kanyang conviction para sa qualified r**e dahil ang kanyang biktima at anak na menor de edad ay hindi nakapagtestigo sa korte. Sa halip, ang sinumpaang salaysay ng biktima na ibinigay sa labas ng korte, kasama ang medico-legal report at mga testimonya mula sa mga kamag-anak ang iprinisinta ng prosekusyon.

Nagpasya ang Korte Suprema na ang mga pahayag sa labas ng korte ng batang biktima ay pinapayagan sa ilalim ng doctrine of unavailable child.

Pinapahintulutan, sa ilalim ng Section 28 ng Rule on Examination of a Child Witness, ang pagtanggap ng hearsay testimony ng isang bata na naglalarawan ng pang-aabuso kapag: (1) ang bata ay unavailable dahil sa kamatayan, pisikal na kapansanan, kawalan ng memorya, o sakit sa pag-iisip; posibleng pagkakalantad sa sikolohikal na pinsala; o kakulangan ng makatwirang paraan; at (2) ang kanilang hearsay testimony ay suportado ng iba pang ebidensya.

Layunin ng Section 28 na pigilan ang miscarriage of justice sa pamamagitan ng pagpapahintulot sa mga kaso ng pang-aabuso sa bata na magpatuloy kahit na hindi available ang batang biktima. Kinilala ng Korte na ang mga vulnerable na bata ay maaaring pilitin na huwag dumalo sa mga pagdinig upang pigilan silang tumestigo. Ang ilang mga batang biktima ay maaari ring na-trauma para magbigay pa ng kanilang testimonya.

Para matukoy kung kapani-paniwala ang testimonya ng isang unavailable child, sinusuri ng Korte ang ilang factor, kabilang ang karakter ng bata, ang bilang ng mga taong nakarinig ng pahayag, kung ang pahayag ay kusang-loob na binigay at kung mayroong anumang motibo sa pagsisinungaling, pati na rin ang timing ng pahayag.

May 25, 2018 nang ang biktima, na noon ay 14 gulang pa lamang, ay nagtapat sa kanyang tiyahin na ginahasa siya ng kanyang ama mula noong siya ay 10 taong gulang pa lamang. Pagkatapos ay dinala siya ng kanyang tiyahin sa barangay hall at sa himpilan ng pulisya upang magsampa ng reklamo.

Basahin ang buong press release: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/sc-child-abuse-case-can-still-be-tried-even-if-victim-cannot-testify-in-court/

Basahin ang buong teksto ng Desisyon: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/258054-people-of-the-philippines-vs-###258054/

25/10/2024

National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) Director Jaime Santiago addresses 19 non-lawyer individuals allegedly operating illegal notary public stalls during a press conference at the NBI main office in Quezon City on Friday.

The 19 non-lawyer individuals were arrested in a coordinated entrapment operation conducted by agents from the NBI Special Task Force, following a complaint from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.

They are accused of engaging in illegal notary public operations in Quezon City and are facing charges for violating the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. (Photos by Miguel De Guzman/The Philippine STAR)

24/01/2023

Magandang araw!

Nais ko pong ipabatid sa inyo na ako po ay lumipat na sa aking bagong opisina sa Unit M-8, Lucena Grand Central Terminal, Diversion Road, Barangay Ibabang Dupay, Lucena City.

Ang akin pong opisina sa 66A A. Dela Cruz St., San Diego Zone I (Poblacion), Tayabas City ay akin na pong isasara.

Maaari niyo pa rin akong tawagan sa aking mga numero: (+63) 916-5995-905 at (+63) 968-2216-408 at sa aking email address:
[email protected].

Maraming salamat po.

Lubos na gumagalang,

Atty. Angelo M. Vanguardia