Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Sociales

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://staging-repositorio.uprit.edu.pe/handle/UPRIT/37

Browse

Settings

Has files: YesSubject: search.filters.subject.Método Dogmático

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Some of the metrics are blocked by your 
    consent settings
    Item type:Item,
    Reglaje o marcaje y la vulneración al principio de proporcionalidad.
    (Universidad Privada de Trujillo, 2020)
    Arellán Pérez, Jorge Wilfredo
    ;
    Soto Cantos, Tirzo
    ;
    Cruz Vegas, Guillermo Alexander
    In this research work, the problem of the criminal type of setting and marking was addressed, but not based on whether or not it is a manifestation of populist criminal law or whether it was born with its back to the rights and principles of criminal law, because it is an undue advance of the punishability barrier; but based on the fact that the principle of proportionality is violated with respect to the crime of simple theft, since the final crime has less penalty than the preparatory act for setting and marking. Hence, the following was raised as a problem: In what sense does the current regulation of the type of marking or regulation violate the principle of criminal proportionality ?; The general objective established in the present investigation was: "to determine what sense the current regulation of the type of marking or regulation violates the principle of criminal proportionality." The analysis of the law, doctrine and jurisprudence was carried out and in light of the dogmatic, doctrinal and synthetic method, the hypothesis was verified: The current regulation of the type of marking or regulation violates the principle of criminal proportionality in the sense that, it sanctions with more serious penalty the preparatory act (Adjustment and marking) than the final crime (simple theft).