Análisis de la motivación en la sentencia condenatoria por intimidación: 17283-2019-00241 dictada por un juez de primer nivel en Ecuador

Abstract

Abstract:This research analyzes the reasoning behind conviction No. 17283-2019-00241, issued by a first-level judge in Ecuador for the crime of intimidation, evaluating whether the sentence complies with the constitutional and jurisprudential principles of sufficient and correct reasoning, applying the analytical-legal method proposed by Manuel Atienza. The facts, the legal issue, the evidence, and the judge's reasoning are also examined, highlighting that, although the sentence meets the formal requirements, it presents weaknesses in the evaluation of evidence and the choice of the criminal offense; the importance of clear and coherent reasoning to guarantee due process and legal certainty is emphasized, offering methodological tools for future analyses of judicial decisions.