Constitutional court dismisses appeal for lack of congruence between judgment and constitutional demand.
Spanien (ES)
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Constitutional Court declared the appeal inadmissible due to a lack of congruence between the contested judgment and the constitutional claim. The applicant requested free legal aid while challenging a sentence, but the court found the demand did not align with the specific constitutional protection sought. Consequently, the procedural requirement for a coherent constitutional complaint was not met.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiertArt. 24 CE; Art. 44 CE: A constitutional appeal is inadmissible if the demand lacks congruence with the contested judgment, requiring the applicant to precisely identify the specific constitutional violation addressed by the decision.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Gesetzesbestimmungen
KI-generiertVolltext
Esta resolución es accesible en formato PDF:
Identificación
Órgano
Sección Cuarta
Magistrados
Don Miguel Rodríguez-Piñero y Bravo-Ferrer, don Antonio Truyol Serra y don Álvaro Rodríguez Bereijo.
Número y fecha BOE
Tipo y número de registro
Recurso de amparo 39-1990
Fecha de resolución
04/06/1990
Síntesis y resumen
Síntesis Descriptiva
Acordando la inadmisión a trámite del recurso de amparo 39/1990
Resumen
Tutela efectiva de Jueces y Tribunales: congruencia de la Sentencia recurrida. Contenido constitucional de la demanda: carencia.
Don Antonio Quiles Rey contra Sentencia del Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Madrid. Art. 24. Solicita justicia gratuita.
containers
Visualización
containers
[PDF] https://hj.tribunalconstitucional.es/HJ/PDF/1990/1990_00229-1990_00039.pdf