The normative conditions of the judgment of fact and the so-called principle of sufficient reason, for the purpose of the appeal for nullity in the Chilean criminal procedure. A procedural criticism
No hay miniatura disponible
Archivos
Fecha
2022
Autores
Profesor/a Guía
Facultad/escuela
Idioma
es
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal
Nombre de Curso
Licencia CC
Attribution 4.0 International
CC BY 4.0
Deed
Licencia CC
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Resumen
In this paper, a procedural analysis of the so-called principle of sufficient reason used in the Chilean criminal process is formulated. For this, it starts by establishing previous concepts on the normative conditions of the factual judgment in relation to the probative merit of the process, in order to examine in that framework and context the meaning and benefit that has been attributed to the principle of sufficient reason in the Chilean criminal process, and the consequences that derive from it for the correct application of the appeal for annulment. In this regard, a dogmatic reasoning is offered that aims to demonstrate that the principle in question is an unnecessary and erroneous concept in the Chilean legal system. © 2022 Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal. All rights reserved.
Notas
Indexación: Scopus.
Palabras clave
Evaluation of the evidence, Judgment of fact, Principle of sufficient reason
Citación
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal, Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages 823 - 867, 2022
DOI
10.22197/rbdpp.v8i2.688