Bibliographic citations
Petrovich, V., Huamani, A. (2024). Requisitos y presupuestos de la prisión preventiva – análisis crítico sobre el Acuerdo-Plenario-1-2019-CIJ-116 [Trabajo de Suficiencia Profesional, Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)]. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/675078
Petrovich, V., Huamani, A. Requisitos y presupuestos de la prisión preventiva – análisis crítico sobre el Acuerdo-Plenario-1-2019-CIJ-116 [Trabajo de Suficiencia Profesional]. PE: Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC); 2024. http://hdl.handle.net/10757/675078
@misc{renati/419896,
title = "Requisitos y presupuestos de la prisión preventiva – análisis crítico sobre el Acuerdo-Plenario-1-2019-CIJ-116",
author = "Huamani Reyes, Alvaro Jose",
publisher = "Universidad Peruana de Ciencias Aplicadas (UPC)",
year = "2024"
}
This Professional Sufficiency Work revolves around the Acuerdo Plenario No. 2019/CIJ-116, focusing on Preventive Detention, an agreement that was the result of the XI Supreme Jurisdictional Plenary in Criminal Matters of the Supreme Criminal Judges, whose purpose is the to agree with the jurisprudential criteria that are applied when interposing the previously mentioned coercive measure in the criminal proceedings of the Peruvian legal system, this when the lack of uniformity in the application of said measure is evident, particularly with regard to budgets (mainly in matters of strong suspicion), requirements (mainly regarding the reasons for invoking preventive detention, and the deadlines, resulting in a series of jurisdictional criteria of mandatory compliance in matters of Preventive Detention, which are delimited in the numerals 24 to 27; from 34 to 55; from 57 to 59 and from 67 to 71 of the legal foundations of the plenary agreement mentioned above. Regarding the development of the work, it focused on three chapters in which different normative and legal sources are used to reinforce the facts, comments and arguments presented, starting with the introduction, which develops the exposition of the legal basis and the assumptions. for the celebration of the Plenary Session and its respective stages; continuing with the theoretical framework, which develops the legal foundations that motivated the decision resulting from the Plenary Agreement; and, ending with the critical analysis of the decision, to which personal appreciation and conclusions are added. This, with the objective of highlighting the importance of proportionality in the criminal procedural system, which will help to formalize the criteria in preventive detention as a result of the disagreement presented in the application of preventive detention.
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License