JurídicoESEN
Order (Auto)July 11, 2019

A- de 2019

The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.

Reporting justice Alberto Rojas Ríos

✓Claimant Gloria Cecilia Fernandez Montaño

01

Topics and subtopics of the ruling

✓What the ruling decides and analyzes, as indexed by the Court's case-law reporter's office. Each topic links to every decision that addresses it.

Recurso De Suplica Contra Auto Que Rechaza Demanda De Inconstitucionalidad
  • Improcedencia por cuanto el recurso de súplica no presenta argumentos que desvirtúen las razones constitutivas del rechazo de la demanda
  • Incumplimiento de requisitos mínimos para la admisión
2 topics · 3 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Recurso de súplica.

El rechazo de la demanda se dio porque el actor no subsanó los requisitos que fueron considerados incumplidos y que se detallaron en el auto de inadmisión.

Luego de verificar que la providencia cuestionada no incurrió en yerro alguno, la Sala Plena decidió no acceder a la súplica formulada y, en consecuencia, CONFIRMARLO en su integridad.

Case-law reporter's text · normalized for reading (all caps → sentence case)
02

What it decided

This decision records no constitutional review holdings. This is common in tutela rulings and orders, where the decision does not concern a legal provision.
·

Operative part (Resuelve)

✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.

  1. PRIMERO. CONFIRMAR el Auto de 6 de junio de 2019, mediante el cual se rechazo la demanda formulada por la ciudadana GLORIA CECILIA FERNANDEZ MONTANO, contra el articulo 189 de la Ley 906 de 2004, "Por la cual se expide el Codigo de Procedimiento Penal", por los cargos relacionados con la presunta vulneracion de los articulos 13, 28, 29, 93 y 228 de la Constitucion.
  2. SEGUNDO. Contra esta providencia no procede recurso alguno.
Verbatim text · source: operative part of the ruling
03

The bench that decided

We distinguish who appears in the ruling (signature, vote or concurrence) from who probably sat on the Court on that date. The difference is shown by color and shape.

04

How it connects

Each decision is a node in the case-law network: it cites some and is cited by others. Follow the threads.

Cites0
It cites no recorded decisions.
Cited by0
No decision cites it yet.

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.