The Supreme Court endorses the reduction of sentences for aggressors by the law of 'only yes is yes'

The Supreme Court has confirmed the criteria of the Provincial Courts in the revisions of sentences carried out after the reform of the Law of ‘only yes is yes’, which has caused the reduction of hundreds of those convicted of sexual assaults and abuses by lowering the fork of the miseries.

The Plenary of the Criminal Chamber of the High Court has agreed to reject the appeals raised by the prosecutor, which postulated the increase in sentences, with the exception of the accessory penalties of the rights to parental authority and guardianship. The petitions of those convicted in the appeals they presented are also dismissed.

Of the 29 appeals analysed, 27 have been unanimously resolved by the Plenary. One has been by majority but without announcing a particular vote, and the other, for which Judge Andrés Palomo was the rapporteur, has caused the change of presentation, which will be assumed by Judge Leopoldo Puente, and which is the only matter that will count. with individual votes.

In this sentence, the majority criterion for rejecting the prosecutor’s appeal has been assumed by the president of the Chamber, Manuel Marchena, and by the magistrates Julián Sánchez Melgar, Juan Ramón Berdugo, Pablo Llarena, Vicente Magro, Carmen Lamela, Eduardo de Porres , Ángel Luis Hurtado, Leopoldo Puente and Javier Hernández. The particular vote will be signed by magistrates Andrés Palomo, Ana Ferrer, Susana Polo, Andrés Martínez Arrieta and Antonio del Moral.

On the other hand, the Chamber has rejected the application of the Fifth Transitory Provision of the Penal Code of 1995.

The Chamber has studied in this monographic plenary session 29 appeals (7 from the Prosecutor’s Office and 22 from those convicted of sexual crimes) presented against the revisions that the Provincial Courts have made of sentences of sexual crimes that were already final when the Law entered into force Organic 10 / 2022.

Until now, the Chamber had only resolved appeals filed against sentences that were not final when the law entered into force. Specifically, it had analyzed 75 appeals that had been resolved with 28 sentence reductions and with 47 sentences that had maintained the sentences that were set before the reform.