Constitutional court dismisses appeal due to lack of content and insufficient evidence of innocence violation.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Constitutional Court declared inadmissible the appeal against a traffic safety conviction, citing a lack of substantive content in the claim. The petitioner argued that the trial violated his right to a presumption of innocence under Article 24.2 of the Constitution, but the court found no sufficient evidence of such a violation. Consequently, the appeal was rejected because the demand failed to meet the required constitutional standards for admissibility.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 24.2 C.E.; The Constitutional Court requires a demand for an appeal to demonstrate a clear violation of the right to a presumption of innocence through specific procedural defects, rejecting appeals lacking sufficient content or evidence of such violation.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedFull text
*Este auto no incorpora doctrina constitucional.*
Identificación
Órgano
Sección Tercera
Magistrados
Doña Gloria Begué Cantón, don Fernando García-Mon y González-Regueral y don Jesús Leguina Villa.
Número y fecha BOE
Tipo y número de registro
Recurso de amparo 596-1987
Fecha de resolución
23/05/1988
Síntesis y resumen
Síntesis Descriptiva
Acordando la inadmisión a trámite del recurso de amparo 596/1987
Resumen
Inadmisión. Derecho a la presunción de inocencia: actividad probatoria. Contenido constitucional de la demanda: carencia.
Don Jacobo Viguera Galán interpone recurso de amparo contra Sentencia de la Audiencia Provincial de Madrid confirmatoria de la dictada por el Juzgado de Instrucción núm. 22 que condenó por delito contra la seguridad del tráfico. Invoca la vulneración
de los derechos consagrados en el art. 24.2 C.E.
containers
Visualización
containers