Bibliographic citations
This is an automatically generated citacion. Modify it if you see fit
Espino, J., (2023). Informe Jurídico sobre Casación N° 617-2021 Nacional [Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú]. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/25623
Espino, J., Informe Jurídico sobre Casación N° 617-2021 Nacional []. PE: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú; 2023. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/25623
@misc{renati/527040,
title = "Informe Jurídico sobre Casación N° 617-2021 Nacional",
author = "Espino Gil, Jorge Luis",
publisher = "Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú",
year = "2023"
}
Title: Informe Jurídico sobre Casación N° 617-2021 Nacional
Authors(s): Espino Gil, Jorge Luis
Advisor(s): Valcárcel Angulo, Mariella Lenkiza
Keywords: Derecho procesal penal--Jurisprudencia--Perú; Excepciones legales--Jurisprudencia--Perú; Delitos de los funcionarios--Jurisprudencia--Perú; Lavado de dinero--Jurisprudencia--Perú
OCDE field: https://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#5.05.02
Issue Date: 7-Aug-2023
Institution: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú
Abstract: La casación 617-2021-Nacional resuelve la excepción de improcedencia de
acción planteada por la defensa de Humala Tasso y Heredia Alarcón en el en el
marco del proceso que se les sigue por el delito de lavado de activos. Entre los
varios temas que se abordan en la casación, se encuentra uno que no es
atendido en su debida dimensión: la posibilidad de estimar una suerte de
acuerdo colusorio previo como un elemento subjetivo del tipo penal de lavado
de activos. El órgano supremo se abstiene de desarrollar el fondo de esta
controversia aduciendo que ella responde a un tema estrictamente probatorio,
que de ninguna manera puede ser objeto de esta excepción. Con ello, se
pierde una oportunidad valiosa para definir el alcance del tipo penal de lavado
de activos y de colusión, con miras a una adecuada delimitación del objeto
procesal en un caso de especial gravedad.
En este informe abordo el tema descartado por la Corte Suprema y construyo
una posición al respecto. En esa tarea, desarrollo los elementos de tendencia
interna trascendente que el delito de colusión simple y de lavado de activos
poseen en su configuración normativa. Asimismo, asumo una posición que
deslinda de lo expresado por la Corte Suprema para evitar un pronunciamiento
sobre el fondo: planteo que es posible sostener que lo cuestionado por la
defensa constituye un problema de indebida subsunción en el tipo subjetivo y
no un tema de prueba; en consecuencia, puede ser resuelto mediante la
excepción de improcedencia de acción.
Cassation 617-2021-Nacional resolves the exception of inadmissibility of the action raised by the defense of Humala Tasso and Heredia Alarcón in the trial against them for the crime of money laundering. Among the several issues addressed in the cassation, there is one that is not addressed in its proper dimension: the possibility of considering a kind of prior collusive agreement as a subjective element of the criminal offense of money laundering. The supreme court refrains from developing the merits of this controversy, arguing that it responds to a strictly evidentiary issue, which in no way can be the object of this exception. With this, a valuable opportunity is lost to define the scope of money laundering and collusion, with a view to an adequate delimitation of the procedural object in a particularly serious case. In this report I address the issue discarded by the Supreme Court and build a position on the matter. In this task, I develop the elements of transcendent internal tendency that the crime of simple collusion and money laundering have in their normative configuration. Likewise, I assume a position that distances from what was expressed by the Supreme Court to avoid a pronouncement on the merits: I argue that it is possible to sustain that what is questioned by the defense is a problem of improper subsumption in the subjective type and not a matter of evidence; consequently, it can be solved through the exception of inadmissibility of the action.
Cassation 617-2021-Nacional resolves the exception of inadmissibility of the action raised by the defense of Humala Tasso and Heredia Alarcón in the trial against them for the crime of money laundering. Among the several issues addressed in the cassation, there is one that is not addressed in its proper dimension: the possibility of considering a kind of prior collusive agreement as a subjective element of the criminal offense of money laundering. The supreme court refrains from developing the merits of this controversy, arguing that it responds to a strictly evidentiary issue, which in no way can be the object of this exception. With this, a valuable opportunity is lost to define the scope of money laundering and collusion, with a view to an adequate delimitation of the procedural object in a particularly serious case. In this report I address the issue discarded by the Supreme Court and build a position on the matter. In this task, I develop the elements of transcendent internal tendency that the crime of simple collusion and money laundering have in their normative configuration. Likewise, I assume a position that distances from what was expressed by the Supreme Court to avoid a pronouncement on the merits: I argue that it is possible to sustain that what is questioned by the defense is a problem of improper subsumption in the subjective type and not a matter of evidence; consequently, it can be solved through the exception of inadmissibility of the action.
Link to repository: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12404/25623
Discipline: Derecho
Grade or title grantor: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. Facultad de Derecho.
Grade or title: Abogado
Juror: Villarroel Quinde, Carlos Abel; Rodríguez Vásquez, Julio Alberto; Valcárcel Angulo, Mariella Lenkiza
Register date: 7-Aug-2023
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License