The Disciplinary Chamber of the Superior Council of the Judiciary confirmed the sanction of censure imposed on a lawyer for neglecting the proceedings of the professional performance (provided for in article 37, numeral 1, of Law 1123 of 2007 ), while acting as a defender of Confidence in a criminal process.
The high court evidenced that the absence of the togado to several proceedings had been justified only orally before the judicial operator, who did not hesitate to issue copies to the disciplinary court reproaching his actions.
However, the lawyer reiterated in the disciplinary process that the absences to the proceedings scheduled to resolve the aggravated homicide trial were due to the fact that the field investigators had not given him the material evidence necessary for the development of the defense by the Failure to pay their fees, which were borne by their principal.
Precisely, he tried to leave untouched arguing that his defense strategy depended on the photographs, documents and other elements that these people had in his possession; but this excuse, lacking support to support it, joined other wielders to justify its absence.
And it is that the physical ailments and the death of a family member who invoked did not have support, such as medical disabilities or death certificates, a situation that was criticized by the corporation and reason to ensure that the conduct of the legal professional was adapted to the fault attributed (MP Julia Emma Garzón).
Superior Council of the Judiciary, Judgment 70001110200020180003601 (1637736), Apr. 10/19.
0 comentarios:
Publicar un comentario