Constitutional Court dismisses appeal due to lack of procedural standing and insufficient evidence of innocence violation.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Constitutional Court declared inadmissible the appeal filed by Miguel Costa Bello against a provincial court sentence regarding smuggling. The applicant claimed a violation of the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence under Article 24 of the Constitution. The court rejected the claim because the applicant lacked standing to challenge the specific procedural aspects and failed to demonstrate a concrete violation of his rights.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 24 C.E.; Art. 24.1 CE: The right to judicial protection requires a direct and effective interest; an appeal is inadmissible if the applicant lacks standing to challenge the specific procedural act or fails to substantiate a concrete violation of constitutional rights.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedFull text
Esta resolución es accesible en formato PDF:
Identificación
Órgano
Sección Segunda
Magistrados
Don Francisco Rubio Llorente, don Antonio Truyol Serra y don Miguel Rodríguez-Piñero y Bravo-Ferrer.
Número y fecha BOE
Tipo y número de registro
Recurso de amparo 1776-1987
Fecha de resolución
09/05/1988
Síntesis y resumen
Síntesis Descriptiva
Acordando la inadmisión a trámite del recurso de amparo 1.776/1987
Resumen
Inadmisión. Derecho a la presunción de inocencia: prueba de cargo. Contenido constitucional de la demanda: carencia.
Don Miguel Costa Bello interpone recurso de amparo contra Sentencia de la Sección Segunda de la Audiencia Provincial de Pontevedra, dictada en causa por contrabando. Invoca la vulneración de los derechos consagrados en el art. 24 C.E.
containers
Visualización
containers
[PDF] https://hj.tribunalconstitucional.es/HJ/PDF/1988/1988_00555-1987_01776.pdf