JurídicoESEN
Constitutional review ruling (C)September 17, 2002Full bench

C-759 de 2002

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

Reporting justice Clara Inés Vargas Hernández

✓Claimant Marcela Patricia Jimenez Arango

✓
Topic · hard data
Cosa Juzgada Material En Improcedencia De Recurso Ante Arresto En Desarrollo De Audiencia En Penal
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.

Cosa Juzgada Material
  • Naturaleza y producción
  • Alcance
  • Improcedencia de recurso ante arresto en desarrollo de audiencia en penal
  • Presentación
1 topic · 4 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
Case-law reporter's summary (what was argued and decided, in prose)

Ley 600 de 2000.

Art. 409 (p.).

Codigo de procedimiento penal.

Direccion de la audiencia.

Procedencia de recursos.

Cosa juzgada constitucional material.

Estese a lo resuelto en c-657/96 que declaro exequibilidad.

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

What it decided

Holdings on Decreto ley 2700/91. Hard data, verified against the operative part — citable.

Art. 453Decreto ley 2700/91 «decisión contra la cual no procede recurso alguno»UPHELD
Art. 406Ley 600/00UPHELD
Art. 409Ley 600/00UPHELD
3 holdings · source: operative part of the ruling
·

Operative part (Resuelve)

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

  1. en nombre del pueblo y por mandato de la Constitución,
  2. RESUELVE:
  3. ESTÉSE A LO RESUELTO en la sentencia C-657 de 1996 que declaró EXEQUIBLES las expresiones "decisión contra la cual no procede recurso alguno", del artículo 453 del Decreto Ley 2700 de 1991, y en consecuencia se declara EXEQUIBLE el segmento normativo demandado del artículo 409 de la Ley 600 de 2000.
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.

The document’s networkthe most influential links · node size is how often the Court cites it
constitutional review unification tutela

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