Eighteen-month prison sentence for attempting to burgle two shops in Estepona

The High Court of Justice of Andalucía has revoked the initial sentence of a Malaga court after partially upholding the defendant's appeal

SUR

Malaga

Thursday, 15 May 2025, 22:39

The High Court of Justice of Andalucía (TSJA) has sentenced a man to a year and a half in prison for attempting to burgle two establishments in Estepona after forcing access and causing damage. The top court in the region revoked the initial sentence of the Malaga court, after partially upholding the defendant's appeal.

According to the investigation, the defendant, who has multiple criminal records, broke the lock of a shop in Estepona in April 2024. He gained access and seized "some coins, the total amount of which has not been specified". What is known for sure is that the amount was less than ten euros.

With the intention of further "enriching" himself, as the initial sentence stated, he went to a tailor's shop in the area, where he did the same: broke the lock and took some coins, during the process of which he broke some cupboards.

He was convicted of the crime of burglary in an establishment open to the public, with a continuous nature and with the aggravating circumstance of recidivism. The court in Malaga sentenced him to four years and one day in prison.

However, the defence filed an appeal. After studying the appeal, the High Court of Andalucía has upheld the investigation carried out by the Malaga court, modifying one fact. Namely, the High Court stated that "there is no evidence that he took possession of any object".

After reviewing the available evidence, the court stated that it agreed with the original court’s conclusion that, based on logic and common experience, the accused was indeed the one who committed both attempted robberies.

However, the appeals court also agreed with the defence that the accused was not found carrying any money, even though the original ruling claimed he had taken some. The police officers did not see him try to get rid of any stolen items, which suggests that he never actually took anything.

For this reason, the High Court applied the principle of 'in dubio pro reo' ('when in doubt, rule in favour of the defendant') and concluded that there was no proof he successfully stole anything. As a result, he was cleared of having committed the full crime of burglary and was instead convicted of attempted burglary .

Top 50

Esta funcionalidad es exclusiva para registrados.

Reporta un error en esta noticia