En el presente informe jurídico se aborda la acción de revisión interpuesta por
Ricardo Ávalo Flores, contra la sentencia que lo condenó como autor del delito de
libramiento indebido. La argumentación central se basa en determinar que la Corte
Suprema no valoró la prueba nueva presentada por el accionante, ni motivó
correctamente la sentencia, conforme a las garantías del debido proceso y la tutela
jurisdiccional efectiva.
Se advierte una deficiente valoración sobre la alegada vulneración del derecho de
defensa, al haber sido asesorado por un abogado que no contaba con título válido.
Además, se evidencian deficiencias en la valoración probatoria realizada por la
Corte Suprema, al no aplicar rigurosamente sus propios criterios jurisprudenciales
e incurrir en errores fácticos.
Finalmente, se identifican falencias en la debida motivación de la sentencia, al omitir
la valoración de pruebas críticas, utilizar falacias y generalizaciones sin sustento
probatorio, y no abordar correctamente las cuestiones centrales planteadas por el
accionante. / This legal report addresses the review action filed by Ricardo Ávalo Flores against
the sentence that convicted him as the perpetrator of the crime of improper drafting.
The central argument is based on determining that the Supreme Court did not
evaluate the new evidence presented by the petitioner, nor did it properly justify the
sentence, in accordance with the guarantees of due process and effective judicial
protection.
There is a deficient assessment of the alleged violation of the right to defense, as
the defendant was advised by a lawyer who did not have a valid license.
Furthermore, there are evident deficiencies in the evidentiary assessment conducted
by the Supreme Court, as it did not rigorously apply its own jurisprudential criteria
and incurred factual errors.
Finally, shortcomings are identified in the proper justification of the sentence, as it
omits the evaluation of critical evidence, uses fallacies and generalizations without
evidentiary support, and does not correctly address the central issues raised by the
petitioner.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:PUCP/oai:tesis.pucp.edu.pe:20.500.12404/28467 |
| Date | 07 August 2024 |
| Creators | Rivadeneira Benitez, Rosa Rebeca |
| Contributors | Paredes Miranda, Brando Javier |
| Publisher | Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, PE |
| Source Sets | Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú |
| Language | Spanish |
| Detected Language | Spanish |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis |
| Format | application/pdf, application/pdf, application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/pe/ |
Page generated in 0.0015 seconds