\u00a0 \u00a0 Proceso No. 15921 \u00a0<\/p>\n
CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA \u00a0<\/p>\n
SALA DE CASACION PENAL \u00a0<\/p>\n
MAGISTRADO PONENTE: \u00a0<\/p>\n
DR. RICARDO CALVETE RANGEL \u00a0<\/p>\n
APROBADO ACTA No. 098 \u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Santa \u00a0Fe \u00a0de Bogot\u00e1, D.C., julio seis de mil novecientos noventa y \u00a0nueve. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
VISTOS \u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0La \u00a0Corte \u00a0resuelve \u00a0sobre la admisibilidad de la demanda instaurada \u00a0por \u00a0el \u00a0abogado\u00a0 \u00a0GUSTAVO \u00a0PATI\u00d1O \u00a0ALVAREZ, \u00a0quien afirma que act\u00faa como \u00a0apoderado \u00a0de \u00a0HENRY \u00a0HAMIOY \u00a0QUIATIAL, \u00a0y pretende la revisi\u00f3n del proceso que \u00a0culmin\u00f3 \u00a0con \u00a0sentencia condenatoria\u00a0 proferida por un Juzgado Regional de \u00a0Medell\u00edn, confirmada por el Tribunal Nacional. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
CONSIDERACIONES DE LA SALA \u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0La \u00a0acci\u00f3n de revisi\u00f3n es un tr\u00e1mite posterior e independiente de \u00a0las \u00a0instancias, \u00a0con \u00a0la \u00a0cual se ataca la condici\u00f3n de cosa juzgada adquirida \u00a0por \u00a0una \u00a0decisi\u00f3n ejecutoriada, bien sea sentencia, cesaci\u00f3n de procedimiento \u00a0o preclusi\u00f3n de la investigaci\u00f3n. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0En \u00a0consecuencia, \u00a0para que un abogado adquiera la legitimidad\u00a0 \u00a0necesaria \u00a0para \u00a0adelantar \u00a0la \u00a0acci\u00f3n \u00a0debe tener poder otorgado especialmente \u00a0para \u00a0esa \u00a0actuaci\u00f3n, \u00a0pues \u00a0la gesti\u00f3n encomendada dentro del proceso termina \u00a0con la ejecutoria de la providencia que le puso fin al proceso. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0En \u00a0el \u00a0asunto \u00a0que nos ocupa el abogado anex\u00f3 un poder dirigido al \u00a0Juez \u00a0Segundo \u00a0de \u00a0Ejecuci\u00f3n de Penas de Palmira (V), proceso 1272, en donde no \u00a0se \u00a0otorgan \u00a0facultades \u00a0para \u00a0instaurar \u00a0la \u00a0acci\u00f3n \u00a0de revisi\u00f3n a nombre del \u00a0sentenciado. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Como \u00a0quiera \u00a0que \u00a0quien \u00a0dice \u00a0representar \u00a0los intereses de HAMIOY \u00a0QUISTIAL\u00a0 \u00a0 no \u00a0 acompa\u00f1\u00f3 \u00a0 al \u00a0libelo \u00a0petitorio \u00a0el \u00a0poder \u00a0debidamente \u00a0otorgado,\u00a0 \u00a0 ello \u00a0 es \u00a0 motivo \u00a0 suficiente \u00a0 para \u00a0 rechazar \u00a0la \u00a0demanda \u00a0presentada. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0En \u00a0m\u00e9rito \u00a0de \u00a0lo \u00a0expuesto, la Corte Suprema de Justicia, Sala de \u00a0Casaci\u00f3n Penal, \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0RESUELVE \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0Rechazar \u00a0la \u00a0demanda por medio de la cual el doctor GUSTAVO PATI\u00d1O \u00a0ALVAREZ \u00a0promueve la acci\u00f3n de revisi\u00f3n a nombre de HENRY HAMIOY QUISTIAL, por \u00a0las razones expuestas en la parte motiva. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
Notif\u00edquese y c\u00famplase. \u00a0<\/p>\n
JORGE ANIBAL GOMEZ GALLEGO \u00a0<\/p>\n
FERNANDO \u00a0E. \u00a0ARBOLEDA \u00a0RIPOLL \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0RICARDO \u00a0 \u00a0 CALVETE \u00a0RANGEL \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
JORGE \u00a0ENRIQUE \u00a0CORDOBA \u00a0POVEDA \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0CARLOS \u00a0AUGUSTO \u00a0 GALVEZ \u00a0 ARGOTE \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
EDGAR \u00a0 \u00a0LOMBANA \u00a0 \u00a0TRUJILLO \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0MARIO MANTILLA NOUGUES \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
CARLOS \u00a0 E. \u00a0 MEJIA \u00a0 ESCOBAR \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0NILSON \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0PINILLA \u00a0 \u00a0 PINILLA \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
PATRICIA SALAZAR CUELLAR \u00a0<\/p>\n
Secretaria \u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u00a0 \u00a0 Proceso No. 15921 \u00a0 CORTE SUPREMA DE JUSTICIA \u00a0 SALA DE CASACION PENAL \u00a0 MAGISTRADO PONENTE: \u00a0 DR. RICARDO CALVETE RANGEL \u00a0 APROBADO ACTA No. 098 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0Santa \u00a0Fe \u00a0de Bogot\u00e1, D.C., julio seis de mil novecientos noventa y […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2413","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-7"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dmsjuridica.com\/buscador_20179478954\/salapenalcronologico20230723\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2413","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dmsjuridica.com\/buscador_20179478954\/salapenalcronologico20230723\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dmsjuridica.com\/buscador_20179478954\/salapenalcronologico20230723\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dmsjuridica.com\/buscador_20179478954\/salapenalcronologico20230723\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dmsjuridica.com\/buscador_20179478954\/salapenalcronologico20230723\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2413"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/dmsjuridica.com\/buscador_20179478954\/salapenalcronologico20230723\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2413\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dmsjuridica.com\/buscador_20179478954\/salapenalcronologico20230723\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2413"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dmsjuridica.com\/buscador_20179478954\/salapenalcronologico20230723\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2413"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dmsjuridica.com\/buscador_20179478954\/salapenalcronologico20230723\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2413"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}