Constitutional appeal dismissed due to procedural expiration and lack of constitutional content in the claim.
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Constitutional Court declared inadmissible the appeal filed by Don Carlos José Bello Díez against a criminal judgment confirming a sentence for lack of Article 586.3 of the Penal Code. The applicant invoked a violation of Article 24.1 of the Constitution regarding the right to a court, but the court found the claim lacked constitutional substance and was time-barred. Consequently, the action was rejected because it failed to meet the procedural requirements for admissibility under the relevant constitutional framework.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 24.1 C.E.; Art. 43 C.E.: The Constitutional Court must reject an appeal if the claim lacks constitutional content or if the procedural deadlines for filing have expired, thereby preventing the court from examining the merits of the alleged rights violation.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedFull text
*Este auto no incorpora doctrina constitucional.*
Identificación
Órgano
Sección Cuarta
Magistrados
Don Ángel Latorre Segura, don Carlos de la Vega Benayas y don Luis López Guerra.
Número y fecha BOE
Tipo y número de registro
Recurso de amparo 349-1988
Fecha de resolución
23/05/1988
Síntesis y resumen
Síntesis Descriptiva
Acordando la inadmisión a trámite del recurso de amparo 349/1988
Resumen
Inadmisión. Plazos procesales: caducidad de la acción. Contenido constitucional de la demanda: carencia.
Don Carlos José Bello Díez interpone recurso de amparo contra Sentencia del Juzgado de Instrucción de Bergara, que en apelación confirma la del Juzgado de Distrito, por falta del art. 586.3.° del Código Penal. Invoca la vulneración del derecho consagrado
en el art. 24.1 C.E.
containers
Visualización
containers