G.R. No. 133949-51 September 16, 1999
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. EFREN BUENDIA y PERALTA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On June 30, 1997, Sofia M. Balena filed three Complaints for rape against Efren Buendia, the common-law husband of her younger sister. The Informations alleged that on or about March 10, 1996, in Makati City, the accused, armed with a knife and by means of force and intimidation, had carnal knowledge of the complainant against her will. When arraigned, appellant pleaded not guilty. The Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 66, after a joint trial, convicted appellant of three counts of rape and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua for each count and to pay moral damages.
The prosecution’s version, as summarized by the OSG, states that at midnight on March 10, 1996, Sofia was asleep in her home when she was awakened by someone fondling her breasts. She saw appellant, who was naked, and when she tried to shout, he covered her mouth with a blanket, poked a knife at her face, and threatened to kill her. He undressed her, overcame her resistance, and raped her three times. Afterward, he threatened to kill her, her father, and her sister, and to burn her house if she reported the incident. Out of fear, Sofia kept silent. She later discovered she was pregnant and left for Antique. Three months after the rape, in June 1996, her uncle and older sister confronted her about her pregnancy, and she revealed the rape. They advised her to file a complaint. She, her father, and her son returned to Makati on December 22, 1996, but the complaint was filed only in February 1997 because she gave birth on December 24, 1996.
The defense denied the charge and claimed that appellant and complainant were lovers. Appellant testified that they had consensual sexual intercourse on several occasions, including three times at the back of Betromix in Fort Bonifacio and many times in his house. He claimed he was the one who spent for the birth of Sofia’s first child in 1994 and that he accompanied her and her child to the pier when they left for Antique in June 1996.

ISSUE

The main issue is the credibility of the lone prosecution witness, Sofia Balena. Appellant assigns errors that the trial court: (1) erred in convicting based on the lone witness’s testimony which was contrary to human experience; (2) erred in giving credence to the complaint despite a delay in filing; and (3) erred in rejecting the defense’s “sweetheart theory.”

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is entitled to great weight and respect, absent any showing that it overlooked facts or circumstances of weight and substance that would affect the case’s result. The Court found no reason to disturb the trial court’s finding that Sofia was a credible witness. Her detailed testimony on how appellant raped her three times at knifepoint was straightforward and consistent.
The Court held that the testimony of a lone witness, if credible, is sufficient to sustain a conviction. It also ruled that resistance is not an element of rape, and its absence does not weaken the victim’s claim of force and intimidation. The delay in reporting the crime was sufficiently explained by the appellant’s threats to kill her and her family and burn her house, which instilled fear. The defense of a romantic relationship was rejected as a mere denial, which cannot prevail over the positive and credible testimony of the victim. The penalties and awards of moral damages were affirmed.