Motivación en las sentencias emitidas por los jueces de primer nivel en Ecuador

Abstract

Abstract: This paper analyzes the judicial reasoning in the judgment issued in criminal case No. 12283-2018-00558, brought against Pablo Daniel Litardo Tarira for the crime of robbery, with the purpose of determining whether the ruling meets the standards of sufficient and correct reasoning required by the Constitution and the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Ecuador. Through the analytical method and the application of questionnaires on sufficiency and correct reasoning, it was found that the judge based his decision on relevant provisions of the Comprehensive Organic Criminal Code (COIP) and on constitutional principles such as legality, proportionality, and due process, demonstrating a coherent, logical, and verifiable argumentative structure. The results show that the judgment does not present any motivational deficiencies, and therefore does not require correction or annulment. This study contributes to the understanding of the argumentative quality of judicial decisions and to the consolidation of a rational and rights-based criminal justice system.