The SCJ rules that the type of crime must be taken into account when imposing a sentence in cases of sexual assault and rape

The Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice ruled that judges must apply standards of reasonableness when determining whether the length of a sentence exceeds reasonable limits in interpreting criminal law with respect to the crime of sexual assault and the crime of rape.  

In this regard, the aforementioned court, by Judgment No. 001-022-2021-SSEN-01156 dated September 30, 2021, ex officio overturned the contested judgment with respect to the criminal sentence imposed on the defendant of 20 years of imprisonment, modified said sentence, and imposed a sentence of 10 years of imprisonment.  

According to the ruling, “incest” is an aggravating circumstance in both the sexual assault as well as for the rape, so that for an act to be classified as incest, it may be classified as incestuous sexual assault or as incestuous sexual assault.  

 The ruling emphasizes that when the rape is committed as “incest” (Article 332-2 of the Penal Code), the maximum penalty established for the crime of rape, by applying Articles 331 and 332-1 of the Penal Code in conjunction (20 years of imprisonment); and that in cases involving sexual assault that does not involve rape The applicable penalty is 10 years of imprisonment, as established by Article 333 of the aforementioned Code. 

 The decision was issued by Judge Francisco Jerez Mena, who presides over the chamber, and the other judges Fran Soto Sánchez and Moisés Ferrer Landrón. 

For more information, visit here.

Source