The Sixth Section of the Provincial Court has confirmed a sentence of two and a half years in prison imposed by the Criminal Court number 3 of Arrecife on a defendant accused of robbery with force in a vehicle and who is also a repeat offender.
According to what is considered proven, at about 10 p.m. on May 11, 2017, the accused "entered" a car that was parked on Calle Irlanda in Arrecife "breaking the rear window with a stone to do so" and stole the vehicle's sound equipment, a fleece jacket, sunglasses, a flashlight and a glasses case, "then fleeing."
Therefore, the Criminal Court number 3 of Arrecife issued a sentence in February of this year sentencing the accused to a penalty of two years and six months in prison with the concurrence of the aggravating circumstance of recidivism. And it is that, on the same one already weighed a firm condemnation of two years and a month of prison, dictated in 2013, by another crime of robbery with force in the things.
He denied being the author but it is considered that "there are many indications"
The accused, however, appealed his second conviction alleging that "from the evidence appreciated in the judgment and especially from the indications indicated, participation in the events cannot be deduced." In addition, he alleged "the impossibility of appreciating the recidivism as well as the absence of accreditation of the force in the things", all of which claims have been rejected by the Sixth Section of the Provincial Court.
"There are many indications which the appealed judgment details extensively and among them this court highlights that the complainant herself who surprised the accused in a suspicious attitude attached to her vehicle saw that some keys fell to him, which turned out to be the keys of her son, who was inside the vehicle, so being the author of the subtraction turns out to be the only possible explanation of this formation", points out in a judgment dated July 29.
In addition, the court points out that "another witness saw the face of the subject crouching next to the vehicle perfectly, described him to the agents, recognized him photographically" and also did so "unquestionably" in the trial.
Regarding recidivism, the Sixth Section of the Provincial Court indicates that "said background could in no way be canceled." And it is that, for it to be so, three years had to pass together with the time of conviction that was imposed on him in 2013, which was two years and one month in prison, which means "a minimum period of five years and one month", time that has not elapsed.
