Bibliographic citations
Díaz, S., (2019). La prueba de la intención ante casos difíciles y la debida motivación de las decisiones judiciales en el proceso penal peruano [Tesis, Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego - UPAO]. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12759/4816
Díaz, S., La prueba de la intención ante casos difíciles y la debida motivación de las decisiones judiciales en el proceso penal peruano [Tesis]. : Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego - UPAO; 2019. https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12759/4816
@misc{renati/373421,
title = "La prueba de la intención ante casos difíciles y la debida motivación de las decisiones judiciales en el proceso penal peruano",
author = "Díaz Chunga, Sergio Eduardo",
publisher = "Universidad Privada Antenor Orrego - UPAO",
year = "2019"
}
The present research is situated in the problematic of the determination of specific intentions in the criminal procedural law, in specific, in the discussion on if these are matter of ascription, of proof or are irrelevant for the criminal law; then, the problem consist in: is the proof of intention, as fact and element of human action, necessary facing hard cases in the Peruvian criminal process? It was preliminarily answered with the hypothesis that proof of intention is necessary in the criminal proceeding; because, the separation between factual and normative questions placed the determination of intention as a matter of proof, hence judicial decisions would be emitted duly motivated. In order to contrast this hypothesis, it started with doctrinal, normative, jurisprudential, sentencing and author positions indicators; so, the bases were developed on the theory of proof, the theory of crime and the theory of legal argumentation, all necessary to solve the problem; and, with the same aim, on the results obtained from the jurisprudential, casuistic and doctrinal positions, of the treatments on intention in the legal systems of the United Kingdom, the United States of America, Spain and Peru. As a result, the hypothesis has been confirmed, reaching the conclusion that intention is a psychological fact and, as such, its determination must be a matter of proof, in order to achieve a proper motivation of judicial decisions in relation to the justification of the factual premise; but, it has been delimited that this occurs when, of the principles of legality and of culpability for the fact, the proof of a specific intention is strictly required, originating a hard case in matter of facts in base of the hypotheses in the criminal process. Should recommend, the complementation of these conclusions, through research on models of proof of psychological facts and the theory of mens rea.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.