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

Abstract

Abstract: This study analyzes the judicial reasoning behind Judgment No. 09281-2019-XXXXX, which upheld a finding of innocence, with the aim of evaluating whether the decision issued by the trial judge meets the constitutional standards of sufficient and correct reasoning required by the Ecuadorian legal system. Employing a qualitative approach descriptive and analytical in nature and grounded in the doctrinal legal method and content analysis, specific matrices and questionnaires were used to examine the ruling's normative and factual basis, as well as the internal coherence of its reasoning. The results demonstrate that the judgment clearly and logically articulates the proven facts, the assessment of evidence in accordance with the rules of sound judgment (*sana crítica*), and the appropriate application of constitutional and criminal norms, thereby ruling out any deficiencies in the reasoning. Furthermore, the absence of horizontal or vertical appeals was identified as an indicator of the decision's legal quality and stability. This study contributes to strengthening the analysis of judicial decisions and enhancing the practical understanding of reasoning standards.