JUDGE RAMOS V. BICAD (ADMIN LAW, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE)

The acquittal of Bicad in the criminal case does not result in the dismissal of the administrative case against him. In ADMINISTRATIVE CASES, the quantum of proof necessary to hold respondent liable is SUBSTANTIAL OR COMPETENT EVIDENCE while proof beyond reasonable doubt is necessary to convict an accused in a criminal case. Thus, even if respondent in the administrative case is acquitted in the criminal case, the administrative case may be pursued.

Th act of respondent in having carnal knowledge of a minor is deplorable and must be abhorred. Such revolting act has no place in the judiciary, the true temple of justice. Bicad has shown his lack of morality, discipline, and restraint to his lustful desires.

It must be emphasized that the image of the court of justice is necessarily mirrored in the conduct of the men and women who work thereat, from the judge to the personnel holding the lowest position. Thus, the Court has, time and again, reminded every member of the judiciary to adhere to the exacting standards of morality, decency, and uprightness to maintain the people's respect and faith in the judiciary.