The People of the Philippines vs. J.J.

Kottinger
G.R. No. 20569 | October 29, 1923
Malcolm, J.
Topic: Immoral Doctrines and Obscene Publications and Exhibitions
Facts:

Issue:

Held:
People of the Philippines v. Aparici (G.R. No. 13375-R, August 30, 1955)
Topic: Immoral Doctrines and Obscene Publications and Exhibitions

Facts:

Issue:

Held:
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. MARINA PADAN, et al.
G.R. No. L-7295 | June 28, 1957
Montemayor, J.

Facts: The accused Jose Fajardo, being then the manager, and Ernesto Reyes, as ticket
collector and/or exhibitor, hired their co-accused Marina Padan and Cosme Espinosa to act as
performers or exhibitionists. They performed sexual intercourse in the presence of many
spectators, thereby exhibiting or performing highly immoral and indecent acts or shows thereat.
Fajardo, Reyes, Padan, and Espinosa were charged with a violation of Article 201 of the
Revised Penal Code and were convicted. They claim that what they did was “art.”

Issue: Whether or not the acts committed by the accused are considered “art.”

Held: No. The Supreme Court has had occasion to consider offenses like the exhibition of still
or moving pictures of women in the nude, which it condemned for obscenity and offensive to
morals. In those cases, one might yet claim that there was involved the element of art but an
actual exhibition of the sexual act, preceded by acts of lasciviousness, can have no redeeming
features. In it, there is no room for art. One can see nothing in it but clear and unmitigated
obscenity, indecency and an offense to public morals, inspiring and causing as it does, nothing
but lust and lewdness, and exerting a corrupting influence especially on the youth of the land.
Hence, the acts committed by the accused are not considered “art.”
GAUDENCIO E. FERNANDO and RUDY ESTORNINOS vs. COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 159751 | December 6, 2006
QUISUMBING, J.

Facts: Police officers served the warrant on Rudy Estorninos who introduced himself as the
store attendant of Gaudencio E. Fernando Music Fair. The police searched the premises and
confiscated twenty-five VHS tapes and ten different magazines, which they deemed
pornographic. During trial, the accused waived their right to present evidence and instead
submitted the case for decision. The RTC convicted Gaudencio E. Fernando and Rudy
Estorninos for violation of Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Presidential
Decree Nos. 960 and 969. In this appeal, petitioners contend that the prosecution failed to prove
that at the time of the search, they were selling pornographic materials.

Issue: Whether or not petitioners are guilty as charged

Held: Yes. Mere possession of obscene materials, without intention to sell, exhibit, or give them
away, is not punishable under Article 201. The offense in any of the forms under Article 201 is
committed only when there is publicity. In the present case, petitioners are engaged in selling
and exhibiting obscene materials. The subject premises of the search warrant was the
Gaudencio E. Fernando Music Fair, named after petitioner Fernando. Even his bail bond shows
that he lives in the same place. Moreover, the mayor’s permit shows that he is the
owner/operator of the store. Furthermore, when he preferred not to present contrary evidence,
the things which he possessed were presumptively his. Petitioner Estorninos is likewise liable
as the store attendant actively engaged in selling and exhibiting the obscene materials.
Fredrik P. Nogales, et al. vs. People of the Philippines and Presiding Judge Tita Bughao Alisuag
G.R. No. 191080 | November 21, 2011
Mendoza, J.
Topic: Immoral Doctrines and Obscene Publications and Exhibitions
Facts:

Issue:

Held: