Case Digest (G.R. No. 159751)
Facts:
Gaudencio E. Fernando and Rudy Estorninos v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159751, December 06, 2006, Supreme Court Third Division, Quisumbing, J., writing for the Court.Acting on reports of the sale and distribution of pornographic materials at a retail outlet called Gaudencio E. Fernando Music Fair (Music Fair) located at 564 Quezon Blvd., Quiapo, Manila, officers of the PNP-CIDG NCR conducted surveillance which led to the issuance on May 5, 1999 of Search Warrant No. 99-1216 by Judge Perfecto Laguio of the RTC of Manila, Branch 19. The warrant, issued for alleged violation of Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code, named Gaudencio E. Fernando and a certain Warren Tingchuy and directed the seizure of specified magazines and VHS tapes alleged to be pornographic.
On May 5, 1999 police served the warrant on Rudy Estorninos, who the prosecution says introduced himself as the store attendant. The officers seized twenty-five (25) VHS tapes and ten (10) magazines they deemed pornographic. On September 13, 1999 petitioners Fernando and Estorninos, together with Tingchuy, were charged in an Information for violating Article 201 by selling and exhibiting obscene materials at Music Fair; all pleaded not guilty and trial ensued.
At trial the prosecution offered the confiscated materials and presented Police Inspector Rodolfo Tababan, SPO4 Rolando Buenaventura, and Barangay Chairperson Socorro Lipana, all of whom were present during the raid. The accused moved for a demurrer to evidence; the RTC initially granted leave to file but later denied the demurrer and set reception of evidence for the accused; a motion for reconsideration was denied. The accused then waived their right to present evidence and submitted the case for decision.
The Regional Trial Court, Branch 21, convicted Fernando and Estorninos for violation of Article 201 and sentenced each to four years and one day to six years prision correccional, a fine of P6,000, and costs; Warren Tingchuy was acquitted for lack of evidence. The RTC also ordered confiscation of the exhibited materials. The Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 25796 affirmed the RTC decision "in toto" by Decision dated March 21, 2003 and by Resolution dated September 2, 2003. Petitioners filed this petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 assailing the Court of Appeals' Decision and Resolution.
On appeal before the Court, petitioners argued that the prosecution failed to prove the materials obscene and that Fernando was not shown to be the seller/owner at the time of the raid while Estorninos disputed that he was the store attendant; the Solicitor General countered that ownership and attendant status were proven, invoking Artic...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the prosecution prove that the confiscated magazines and VHS tapes were obscene within the meaning of Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code?
- Did the prosecution prove that petitioners Fernando and Estorninos sold, exhibited, or otherwise distributed the obscene materials such that they may be held l...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)