G.R. No. 137164 ; June 19, 2001
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ALBERT NUBLA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Albert Nubla was charged with rape in an information alleging that on or about March 26, 1996, in Quezon City, by means of force and intimidation, he wilfully, unlawfully, and feloniously induced complainant Romelita Martinez to drink a glass of iced tea laced with drugs causing her to lose consciousness, and thereafter had carnal knowledge with her against her will and without her consent. He pleaded not guilty.
The prosecution’s version, based mainly on complainant Romelita’s testimony, is as follows: In March 1996, Romelita, a 19-year-old student, met the accused to negotiate a car purchase. On the evening of March 26, they met at Wendy’s Nagtahan. The accused invited her to a bar owned by his “compadre” for dinner. Inside the bar, Romelita ordered iced tea. After drinking about a third of it, she felt dizzy and had a headache. She pleaded with the accused to bring her home, but he told her to finish her drink first. After consuming the iced tea, she felt weaker. The accused assisted her into a taxicab. She lost consciousness and later woke up naked beside the naked accused in a room at around 5:30 a.m., feeling pain in her private part and buttocks and with kiss marks on her breast and lap. She later reported the incident to her friend and parents, who brought her to the NBI for examination. Dr. Armie M. Soreta-Umil of the NBI-Medico Legal Division found contusions on her infraclavicular and intermammary areas and an old healed hymenal laceration. When Romelita confronted the accused by phone, he stated it would have been stupid had he brought her to an apartelle without touching her.
The defense presented a different account. The accused testified that Romelita called him to meet and discuss her personal problems. At the bar, she was jolly and light-hearted. He suggested going home, but she became irritated and insisted on being with him. They took a taxi to an apartelle, where she alighted first. He paid for the room. Inside, they watched TV, talked, and eventually had consensual sexual intercourse. He denied spiking her drink or employing force.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that accused-appellant Albert Nubla committed rape by having carnal knowledge of Romelita Martinez through force or intimidation, or by rendering her unconscious.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The trial court’s assessment of the credibility of witnesses is accorded great respect. The Court found Romelita’s testimony to be credible, straightforward, and consistent. Her immediate reporting of the incident to her friend and parents, and the subsequent medical examination, bolster her account. The medical findings, while indicating an old hymenal laceration, are not inconsistent with a recent rape, and the contusions corroborate the use of force. The accused’s claim of consensual sex is belied by Romelita’s conduct before, during, and after the incident. His own statement to her that “it would have been stupid had he brought her to an apartelle without touching her” is a telling admission. The Court held that the prosecution successfully established the elements of rape through force and intimidation, as the accused’s acts of inducing her to drink a spiked beverage, which rendered her weak and unconscious, and subsequently having sexual intercourse with her, constituted force and intimidation. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed.