Inviolability of the domicile. Undue delays

Commentary on the Tribunal Supremo judgments of 21 February 2011

Abstract

Is required to authorize entry and search of a home, that the suspicion of the existence of a crime is founded, ie, based on specific and objective data, no matter how small your organization, allowing the judge to a trial carried out on them of rationality on the effectiveness of crime on circumstantial concerned. In certain cases and circumstances, particularly if there is already a judicial investigation under way, it is possible to complete some points of entry and search warrant with details as noted in the police office requesting the measure. It set the penalty at the time the new legal regulations. So by going the generic mitigating undue delay, the penalty is imposed under the amended provision. The test aims to ring in the nature of direct evidence, because they are manifestations of the accused judicial training and a buyer of drugs. To have to join the police witnesses who saw the substance sold. Personal trials are completed and then reinforced by narcotics intervention. This period of five years from the date of the facts and the trial has to be considered so if you calibrate the particular circumstances, as a special session, but never as an especially remarkable or superextraordinario, which is the condition that must have in order to assess the mitigation of undue delay and highly skilled. It can not be proven consumer status of drugs the defendant, because nothing is said about such use on the date of the facts. Much less can be certain that the addiction had sufficiently material to be considered serious.