{"id":3651,"date":"2024-09-07T11:33:19","date_gmt":"2024-09-07T16:33:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/esford.pe\/?post_type=jurisprudencia&#038;p=3651"},"modified":"2024-09-15T06:46:43","modified_gmt":"2024-09-15T11:46:43","slug":"3651","status":"publish","type":"jurisprudencia","link":"https:\/\/esford.pe\/ing\/jurisprudencia\/3651\/","title":{"rendered":"RESOURCE CASACION N. or 1000 2021 LAMBAYEQUE"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE REPUBLIC<br>CRIMINAL PERMANENT<br>\u2013 1 \u2013<br>ANTHO<br>APPEALS on points of law N. \u00ba 1000-2021\/LAMBAYEQUE<br>SPEAKER: CESAR SAN MARTIN CASTRO<br>Title: civil Redress. Well risky. Strict liability. Items<br>Sumilla. 1. To stem the appeal of the complainant by the object&#039;s civil<br>process, only corresponds to scrutinize whether the facts have been correctly<br>established \u2013if not, there is a serious vitium in iudicando in factum\u2013 and if the rules of<br>material rights are interpreted and applied correctly (vitium in iudicando<br>in iuris). 2. The grievant had no SOAT or license to drive smaller vehicles.<br>The tractor driven by the accused was not brake system front<br>suitable for driving on the paved road, I just had the rear brakes that<br>they worked exclusively for agricultural work. It is of note that the<br>author of the Technical Report Police was discussed in the plenary session and gave an account of the<br>area of impact and the tractor struck the motorcycle \u2013is a test<br>expert, in which the expert report consists in cars and its author was examined in the<br>plenary\u2013. Then, it is erroneous to hold that the expert evidence in mention can&#039;t<br>be used. The petty PNP Lion Cachay is not a witness, an expert, and, as such,<br>prepared the technical report, and explained it in the act of speaking. It joins the merit of the<br>act of intervention and the declaration of its author, the petty PNP Valverde Rafael.<br>3. The article 1970 the Civil Code. It is the driving<br>a well risky, as it is a tractor, and as a result of the traffic accident<br>produced caused a damage to the aggrieved. The article 1972 of the Civil Code excludes,<br>in these cases, the civil liability when the damage was the result, among<br>others, of the recklessness of those who suffer the damage. In such a case, what should<br>be tested is that the grievant acted exclusively with recklessness, of which he was<br>completely oblivious to the defendant. 4. It is true that the aggrieved lacked license<br>driving \u2013and the motorcycle he was riding was not SOAT\u2013 what matters a<br>contributory factor to the event harmful, and must be taken into consideration for the<br>determination of the amount of the civil redress. However, in the particular damage to your<br>person brokered another factor, determinant in this case, on the part of the driver of the<br>tractor, the accused CARLOS SANTAMARIA CASTLE, in so far as it was he who<br>it collided with the motorcycle when not to notice his presence in the place of the facts. No<br>it is proved, therefore, that, in fact, sub-field mediated a recklessness exclusive<br>wronged.<br>\u2013JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF CASSATION\u2013<br>Lima, twenty-fourth day of July, two thousand twenty-four<br>SEEN; in a public hearing: appeal, by<br>the grounds of non-observance of the precept of the proceedings, violation of the precept material,<br>filed by the defense of the actor civil, ANTONY SMITH BACA HORNA,<br>against the judgment of view at two hundred and four, seven December<br>two thousand twenty, confirming at one end and repealing another<br>judgment of the first instance of page hundred and twenty-five, twelve of march<br>two thousand and nineteen, acquitted Carlos Santamar\u00eda Castle of the indictment<br>prosecutor made against them for the crime of injury to a negligent act serious in your<br>tort and dismissed the payment of civil redress in his favour; with everything<br>other than the matter it contains.<br>APPEALS on points of law N. \u00ba 1000-2021\/LAMBAYEQUE<br>\u2013 2 \u2013<br>The speaker has been the mr. SAN MARTIN CASTRO.<br>FUNDAMENTALS OF FACT<br>FIRST. That, according to the indictment attorney at a hundred and fifteen, sixteen<br>of July, two thousand nineteen, the facts that are the subject of the process are as<br>continue to:<br>A. The twenty-fourth day of October, two thousand and fifteen, as the fourteen hours, the<br>indicted CARLOS SANTAMARIA CASTLE was driving the tractor with series<br>PY540L003097, company-owned Hacienda El Potrero<br>Closed joint-stock company Avenue Pakumuros, while the<br>actor civil Antony Smith Baca Horna driving in the same way your<br>motorcycle without plate of filming. When you reach the intersection with the street<br>extension Manco Capac the aggrieved Baca Horna slowed to obey<br>traffic lights, but he was hit in the back of the<br>motorcycle tractor that I drove the accused SANTAMARIA<br>CASTLE, which continued its march, and dragged him to the said injured several<br>meters and stopped by the reaction force exerted by the body of<br>the motorcycle and the wheels of the tractor, leaving traces of drag<br>metal. The tractor had no system of front brake fit<br>to travel on the paved road, I just had the rear brakes that<br>they worked exclusively for agricultural work.<br>B. As a consequence of the facts, the aggrieved Baca Horna turned out<br>injured, and by the severity of the injuries, was taken to the Hospital<br>General of Ja\u00e9n and, subsequently, to Chiclayo. The medical certificate<br>legal 000344-PH-HC concluded: 1. The aggrieved Baca Horna presented<br>injuries contusas kinds of traumatic for event traffic according to history<br>clinical. 2. Presented clinical and radiographic signs of fracture level<br>vertebral L1, according to clinical history. 3. Presented clinical signs of<br>surgical intervention for conclusion one and two. 4. It required forty and<br>five days of care facultative and one hundred and twenty days of disability<br>medico-legal.<br>C. The Inspection Technician Police determined that the defendant SANTAMARIA<br>CASTLE violated National Regulations in Transit: articles 90, 91,<br>92, 93, 95, 107, 146, 155, 160, 161, 227, 271, and 272. The factor<br>determinant of the event was the recklessness of the defendant to not be aware of<br>the change of traffic light, impacting the motorcycle<br>he drove the aggrieved, his lack of skill by not having certificate<br>operator of heavy machinery, issued by the technical school of operators<br>of machinery, the speed with which he drove his machinery and the<br>tractor, property of the third civil responsible, was not in<br>appropriate conditions for operating in a road traffic asphalt and<br>it lacked the brake system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>APPEALS on points of law N. \u00ba 1000-2021\/LAMBAYEQUE<br>\u2013 3 \u2013<br>SECOND. The procedure was developed as follows<br>then:<br>1. The lord provincial Prosecutor of the First Fiscal\u00eda provincial Penal<br>Corporate Ja\u00e9n made charges against CARLOS SANTAMARIA<br>CASTLE for the crime of injury to a negligent act serious, referred to in article<br>124, fourth paragraph, of the Penal Code, in tort Antony Smith Baca<br>Horna.<br>2. Conducted the hearing of control of accusation at twenty-four,<br>issued the writ of trial, issued the summons to judgment of pages<br>forty-six, fourteen of February, two thousand nineteen, the First<br>Criminal court one-man Ja\u00e9n, pre-trial oral, public, and<br>contradictory, issued a ruling of first instance of absolution of pages<br>one hundred twenty-five, twelve of march, two thousand nineteen. Their<br>considerations are:<br>A. Not tested the violation of traffic rules by the defendant<br>SANTAMARIA CASTLE, because it is not established that he crossed the red light<br>the traffic light or that it does not have the capacity to operate the tractor.<br>B. If it is proved the existence of a set of traffic lights at the intersections of<br>the avenue Pakamuros and extension Manco Capac city<br>Ja\u00e9n, the place where the accident occurred, there is no evidence that<br>stating that the defendant crossed the street when the vehicle has been<br>found in red.<br>C. as the lack of training to drive the tractor by<br>of the defendant, nor was tested in such a circumstance, because it does not exist or<br>a minimum of corroboration peripheral on the lack of skill that you<br>attributed, reflected in the lack of technical knowledge to operate the<br>tractor.<br>D. with Respect to the civil remedies, the article 12, paragraph 3 of the CPP<br>he points out that the acquittal does not prevent the body<br>court to rule on the civil action arising from the fact<br>punishable. Article 93 of the CP stipulates that the civil remedies<br>understand the restitution of the property or, if this is not possible the payment of the value<br>and the compensation for the damages caused. Thus,<br>it should be borne in mind that, without prejudice to what is given in<br>relationship to the object of criminal, it is for the judge to decide if you have the<br>criteria of imputation own illegal behavior that resulted in<br>a damage subject to compensation in accordance with article 1969 of the Civil Code.<br>E. So, not having been given the responsibility of the defendant that<br>have a direct impact on the issuance of an acquittal, it is not<br>&#039;t matter the denial of any damage caused to the victim, in both and in<br>how much will it hurt your health, as has been duly<br>tested in this trial.<br>F. Being so, and as prescribed in article 1970 Code<br>Civil set an amount of compensation in favour of the<br>APPEALS on points of law N. \u00ba 1000-2021\/LAMBAYEQUE<\/p>","protected":false},"template":"","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"default","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"set","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}}},"categorias":[28],"class_list":["post-3651","jurisprudencia","type-jurisprudencia","status-publish","hentry","categorias-corte-suprema"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/esford.pe\/ing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/jurisprudencia\/3651","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/esford.pe\/ing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/jurisprudencia"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/esford.pe\/ing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/jurisprudencia"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/esford.pe\/ing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/jurisprudencia\/3651\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/esford.pe\/ing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3651"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"categorias","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/esford.pe\/ing\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categorias?post=3651"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}