The Civil and Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the Valencian Community has fully ratified the resolution issued on March 2 by the Valencia Court, which imposed 28 years in prison on a young man for the murder of an emeritus canon of the Cathedral of Valencia.
The regional court has dismissed one by one the arguments of the appeal presented by the defense, which claimed violations of fundamental rights, the right to the presumption of innocence, and requested the holding of a new trial with a popular jury.
As the popular jury declared proven and the judgment of the Court recorded, the convicted person went to the home of the 79-year-old priest on the night of January 21, 2024, along with another unidentified person.
In the residence, located in the center of Valencia, that unidentified companion ended the life of the canon by asphyxiation, without the victim being able to defend himself, and took his mobile phone, a credit card, and another from a store, items that he later handed over to the now convicted person.
The convicted acted in concert with that unknown individual and following a preconceived plan to end the life of the canon and appropriate his valuable belongings.
With one of the cards, the young man withdrew cash and made purchases totaling over 2,300 euros, part of which he handed over to the material author of the homicide. With the other card, he made purchases worth 375 euros.
The Provincial Court imposed twenty years in prison for a crime of murder, five years for a crime of robbery with violence, and another three years for a continued crime of fraud.
In the judgment now issued on appeal, the Civil and Criminal Chamber of the TSJCV rejects the defense's request to annul the entry and search carried out by the Police in the room of the hostel where the accused was staying, in which the mobile phone and the two cards of the deceased were found.
The judges emphasize that the request for nullity was not made at the appropriate procedural moment, that is, by including it in the provisional qualification document so that it could be resolved according to the Jury Law before the start of the trial, in the preliminary issues phase, but was raised late in the report phase.
In the same way, the court dismisses that the right of the accused not to testify against himself, not to confess guilt, or to use the necessary means of evidence for his defense has been violated.
The High Court of the Community also does not appreciate a breach of norms or procedural guarantees that have produced defenselessness for the appellant, nor relevant errors in the sentence or in the verdict of the jury.
Regarding the alleged violation of the right to the presumption of innocence, the appeal resolution recalls that the TSJCV cannot re-evaluate the evidence presented in the trial and that the different elements of conviction examined by the jurors to issue their verdict "rationally converge on the co-participation of the accused in the intentional death of the victim."
The resolution of the Civil and Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court does not yet acquire firmness, since an appeal for cassation can be filed against it before the Supreme Court.