JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)November 22, 2001

T-1226 de 2001

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

Reporting justice Alfredo Beltrán Sierra

✓Claimant Secundino Sinisterra Peña Vs. Tribunal Superior De Ibague Sala Penal·Respondent Sin Información

✓
Topic · hard data
Derecho Al Debido Proceso. Reiterada Solicitud De Libertad Provisional. Proceso Penal Por Homicidio Simple. Mora Judicial En Resolver Recurso De Apelacion. Justificacion Probada. Acceso A La Administracion De Justicia. Terminos Judiciales. Congestion Judi
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.

Mora Judicial
  • Justificación extraordinaria
1 topic · 1 subtopic · source: case-law reporter's topic index
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.

See the operative part (3 points)
  1. Primero. CONFIRMAR la sentencia del veintinueve (29) de agosto de dos mil uno (2001), proferida por el Consejo Superior de la Judicatura, Sala Jurisdiccional Disciplinaria, en la acción de tutela presentada mediante apoderado por el señor Secundino Sinisterra contra la Magistrada del Tribunal Superior de Ibagué - Sala Penal.
  2. Segundo. EXHORTAR a la Magistrada Cecilia Rojas de Osorio, o a quien ejerza las funciones del cargo, a fin de que de manera acuciosa, agilice el trámite de los procesos pendientes de resolver, para que en el futuro resuelva en el término que corresponda, de conformidad con la ley y respetando el debido proceso los recursos de apelación interpuestos.
  3. Tercero. Por Secretaría General, líbrense las comunicaciones a que se refiere el artículo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991.
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.