Ineficacia del recurso de casación en Costa Rica

Abstract

This study analyzes the admissibility requirements currently in place for processing appeals in criminal cases. A random analysis of several records of the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice and the resolution of the case Mauricio Herrera versus Costa Rica were taken as a parameter on the appeals of judgment in order to determine why the Third Chamber rejects most of said resources. By analyzing jurisprudence, it was established that some criminal lawyers did not know the formalities of Article 468 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and filed those appeals  without analyzing and considering the objective, subjective and contradictory aspects of the rulings of the Court of Criminal Appeals to resolve those sentences and without deeply analyzing the case Mauricio Herrera versus Costa Rica. The most relevant court decisions are revealed through this article as an analogy of the aforementioned case.