THIS WORK WILL PROVIDE US WITH ALL THE INFORMATION

REGARDING THE SUBJECT OF THE REVIEW APPEAL, FROM ITS

LEGAL NATURE TO THE LEVEL OF HOW IT SHOULD BE
CHALLENGED TODAY; THIS WORK WILL OPEN THE HORIZONS OF
OUR LIMITED KNOWLEDGE REGARDING THE SUBJECT, IT WILL
HELP US TO KNOW IN DETAIL ITS IMPORTANCE AND THE
PROTECTION IT HAS IN THE LAW FOR THE BENEFIT OF
CITIZENS. WE HOPE IT IS USEFUL FOR THE EDUCATIONAL
REQUIREMENT OF EVERY READER.

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 1

Scientific doctrine has established that the "extraordinary
appeal for sentence review" is not a resource, but at the same
time it does not clearly establish what the procedural nature of
this "resource" is. Some proceduralists assign to criminal review
the quality of "exceptional remedy" against a final sentence
passed under the authority of res judicata and unjustly issued.
Others assign it an indefinite nature of " independent action
that gives rise to a process whose purpose is to rescind final
and unjust convictions." To determine in our national legal
system the nature and scope of criminal review, it is necessary
to previously analyze the concepts expressed by other
proceduralists about the terms "process, appeal, extraordinary
and review." The analysis of these concepts will allow us to
arrive at a solution to the problem raised.
Process concept.-
In its broadest sense it is equivalent to trial, cause or
lawsuit. Ultimately, process means the logical sequence of
jurisdictional acts in different stages that determine a path to
reach a single truth that will serve as the basis for dictating
the final resolution that will end the dispute. Taking the
conception of Montero Aroca says of the process, which are
procedural acts, from the beginning of the jurisdictional
activity in a specific case until its conclusion through the
final resolution that resolves the litigation, the guarantee
process, in which the plaintiff proposes the object of the
process and the accused is the object of the litigation, it is
contentious, contradictory, it is subject to deadlines for the
exercise of the different procedural acts, the preclusion of
rights operates, it is subject to three procedural instances or
stages, exercise of ordinary and extraordinary resources against
resolutions, said in a simpler way, is a trial or judicial
dispute, which from the macro-legal point of view, is the
sequence of different judicial procedures from the demand or
precautionary measures to the resolution that puts an end to a
lawsuit, being This is an exclusively jurisdictional activity.
Resource Concept.-
The Legal Dictionary of Manuel Osorio conceptualizes it in the
following way: "This is the name given to any means granted by
the procedural law for challenging judicial resolutions, in order
to correct substantive errors and formal defects that have been
incurred." when dictating them" .

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 2

Martínez Marín's Dictionary of Legal Terms conceptualizes the
resource as " Claim that requests the review of a process to
guarantee the correctness of a procedure, it may be ordinary or
extraordinary"
From these two concepts we can deduce that in procedural matters,
recourse is any right that the law grants to the parties so that,
within the same process, they can ask the court of first instance
or higher in degree to review a non-executable judicial
resolution that in its content is believed to be violating the
rights of the parties. The appeal is also contentious,
contradictory and is governed by the guaranteeing principle of
legality and impartiality.
Ordinary Resources.-
They are those whose opposition does not imply a motivation
strictly determined by the Law, and the ad quem or higher court
may have the same extensive knowledge as the Court a quo;
Appeals, supplications and complaints have this qualification.
Extraordinary or cassation appeals.-
We understand by extraordinary or cassation appeals those whose
opposition the Law requires that certain reasons cataloged in the
same rule be met, which obliges the Court ad quem to take
cognizance of certain points and issues. Those that may be due to
violation of the substantive Law or the adjective norm. It is
limited exclusively to these points, and the Superior Court
cannot extend beyond them.
Review Concept.-
Taking the concept expressed by the Ossorio dictionary, the plain
term of revision says: "New consideration or examination,
verification." Later, referring to the criminal review, it says
"extraordinary appeal to rectify a final sentence in the face of
evidence that reveals the error suffered." Taking the simple
concept of review, since it refers to an act of new consideration
or examining again the sentence that is already final, because
there are evidentiary elements that demonstrate that the sentence
should not have been what it was and that at the time of When the
sentence was passed, that evidence was not available to the judge
or that the judge had committed an illegal act during the final
resolution of the judicial function , an illegal act that was
proven in another subsequent trial with a conviction and reached
the status of executory.
Now, having very clear the conceptions of the terms "process,
appeal, extraordinary and review", the question is, could we
consider the nature of criminal review as a resource? Or, is it a

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 3

new process on the object of the deceased trial (process) that
led to the now final sentence? To solve this problem we must
analyze whether the criminal review is appropriate to the nature
of the resources.
Criminal Review as a Resource.-
In a very traditional way, criminal review has been
conceptualized as a resource; we are strictly opposed to this
conception since none of the constitutive elements already
studied of the resources are adapted to criminal review. From the
procedural conception of resources, criminal review would not be
adapted to the nature of ordinary or extraordinary resources,
because in the first place it is not part of the acts of a
jurisdictional process, much less is it a cassation since it is
not a higher procedural instance that seeks to correct
substantive errors or procedural defects in the process, criminal
review is not a claim that seeks to correct a procedure. The
review is an action that does not have a filing period, is within
a criminal process, is not contentious or contradictory, does not
recognize opposing parties and only condemnatory sentences can be
subject to this action in an exclusive manner, it seeks annulment
or modification as unjust of a firm and immovable sentence that
is passed with the authority of res judicata based on new facts
and evidence that demonstrate the unjust conviction. The causes
for which the criminal review proceeds are neither the error in
the legal classification or interpretation of the norm, nor the
erroneous establishment of the facts of the process that led to
the sentence, which with only the existing elements in the
process cannot be would achieve the rescission of the final
sentence, the review must necessarily be based on other
evidentiary facts that were not within the reach of the Court
that handed down the sentence and that if they had been, the
result of the sentence would have been different.
From the plain conception of the term "remedy" in its meaning as
a means or way to achieve an end, apart from its procedural
conception, review could be considered as the only resource for
action or petition, means or way that the Law grants to a
convicted person. to request, in an exceptional or extraordinary
manner, the protection of the review of his conviction, based on
facts or evidence that demonstrate that the sentence is unjust.
Criminal Review as a Process.-
Could criminal review be considered a new process? The answer is
strictly no. We already advanced the concept of process, which we
reiterate for better clarity. The process is a logical sequence
of jurisdictional acts until reaching the final resolution of the
litigation, these acts are due to contradiction, opposition,

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 4

equality of parties, guarantee of due process, provision, object
of the process, object of the litigation, deadlines established
in the Law with operation of the preclusion of right in case of
not exercising in the appropriate time, different stages or
degrees with the possibility of making use of resources before
the same Court of instance as before higher courts in grade until
reaching a third instance, which which does not occur in criminal
review, there is only a single stage and it is unilateral, the
right is granted only to the convicted person, not to the
complainant or civil party, in which the latter's notification
only has the purpose of informing them of the petition for
criminal review without this meaning offering opposition, if a
document was thus opposed, the reviewing Court would not take it
into account as a defense.
The review goes beyond a process, it breaks the impartiality of
the Court as it has the power to produce evidence ex officio,
surpassing the guaranteeing principle of due process of judicial
action that characterizes the processes as a mere dispositive
principle of the parties, taking precedence in The review above
the principle guarantees the Court's duty to do justice with the
truth at any cost. Judicial protection of the review is
reinforced with the method used by the Court and, although the
Law does not establish it, resolve the review in a single hearing
and without further appeal.
In accordance with the jurisprudence established by the Court of
Justice of the Andean Community , the appeal for review is aimed
at correcting an error that was unknown at a certain time, that
is, when the sentence was handed down. Since the extraordinary
appeal for review does not constitute a dispute between the
plaintiff and the defendant.
Responding to our question raised at the beginning of this
section, with greater elements of truth we can affirm that in no
way could criminal review be considered a judicial process for
not complying with the procedural principles contained in a
trial, such as: contradiction, opposition, deadlines, procedural
acts, ordinary and extraordinary appeals against resolutions, the
higher instance. In short, criminal review does not respond to
jurisdictional procedural stages and, above all, the sacrifice of
the principle of guaranteeing legality that characterizes the
Court in the jurisdictional process due to the obligation of
justice of the reviewing Court in seeking to correct the unjust
sentence against the convicted person. .
Solution to the Procedural Nature of Criminal Review.-
Providing a solution to the problem raised regarding the
procedural nature of criminal review, known in our doctrine as

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 5

"extraordinary sentence review resource" or as the Constitutional
Court erroneously calls it "extraordinary sentence review
resource", we can affirm without fear to the mistake that
criminal review from its procedural conception is not an
ordinary, less extraordinary resource, but rather, the term
appeal from conception is attributed to it as the only
exceptional avenue that the Law allows to the convicted person,
his spouse or cohabitant, his defender, to his blood relatives or
relatives if he has died, to the Public Prosecutor's Office, the
Criminal Enforcement Judge and the Ombudsman, to request before
the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the
nation that a final sentence passed under the authority of ress
be reviewed again. judged with the purpose of annulling it -
Iudicium rescindae - or modifying it - iudicium modificatium -
with the sole purpose of repairing an injustice committed by the
judicial system voluntarily or involuntarily. We can call it
indistinctly as "action (or petition) for review of executory
criminal conviction sentence" or failing that, in its simplest
conception as "remedy for review of executory criminal sentence."
It does not make sense to use the term "extraordinary or
exceptional"; it is left as understood every time that it is an
exceptional or extraordinary action as it is the only way to try,
no matter how many times it is attempted, to alter a final
enforceable sentence that is considered immovable or
unchangeable.

The protection of criminal review only applies against

convictions passed under the authority of res judicata, that is,
firmly enforceable. It is important to highlight that it only
applies against conviction sentences, not against acquittal
sentences, which means that only the convicted person can oppose
it and not the deceased plaintiff or plaintiff in the trial and
his request corresponds at any time once the sentence acquires
the quality of execution, there being no limit on the time after
its execution. As we anticipated, for the purposes of the
rehabilitation of the unjustly convicted, in addition to
establishing responsibilities for the damage caused and its
reparation, it may be raised even after the sentence has been
served, even by the heirs and relatives after the death of the
sentenced person.

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 6

In our procedural system, criminal review is reserved solely and
exclusively in favor of the convicted person with an enforceable
sentence, but not for the complainant when the sentence has been
acquittal, which remains irrefutably firm, recognizing no avenue
for its challenge. In the event of the death of the convicted
person and there being sufficient grounds for review, in order to
discharge and preserve the memory of the unjustly convicted
person, the spouse, partner or relative up to the fourth degree
of consanguinity or second degree of affinity may promote
criminal review. Therefore, taking into account the degrees of
blood relationship in descending order, it is empowered to
promote criminal review including the great-great-grandson, that
is, up to the fourth generation successor of the convicted
person, which will allow, first of all, to repair the memory of
the convicted person and also preserve the honor of family
descent. It is novel and very correct that under the principle of
human rights and the altruistic goal of justice as a function of
the State, state protection has been instituted by granting
active legitimation to both the Public Prosecutor's Office and
the Criminal Enforcement Judge to promote criminal review and, as
if this state protection were not enough, legitimation is also
conferred on the Ombudsman as a constitutional body in charge of
contributing to the protection of human and fundamental rights of
people.

The assumptions of admissibility of criminal review in Law 1970

correspond to numerus claustrus of art. 421 of the CPP, which the
petition must necessarily address under penalty of
inadmissibility. The admissibility of criminal review proceeds in
the following cases:
The first assumption is based on a line of jurisprudence, when
the facts taken as grounds for the sentence are incompatible with
those established by another criminal sentence executed in a
similar criminal process or with identical characteristics. For
example, a subject due to the fact of lifting up a vehicle parked
on the street with the engine on, the doors unlocked and without
the driver, has been convicted of the crime of aggravated robbery
and subsequently another subject for the same act with identical
characteristics has been convicted of the crime of theft or
misappropriation, whose sentences have been for minor amounts or
for simple reparation of the damage, it is up to the person
convicted of the crime of aggravated robbery to request criminal
review.

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 7

The second assumption is when the sentence that is intended to be
reviewed has been based on evidence judicially declared false by
means of an enforceable sentence pronounced after the sentence
under review. The evidence declared false can be public or
private documents later declared false in a final criminal
sentence, the false accusation or complaint, simulation of a
crime, false testimony and bribery, declared judicially proven by
executory sentences after the sentence under review. Also the
confession extracted through coercion or violence from the
convicted person, which does not require a subsequent sentence,
as long as the confession has been the only basis without other
documentary, instrumental, testimonial or expert evidence, which
establishes the conviction sentence under review. The difficult
thing is to prove the violence and coercion of the confession; it
can be proven by means of a forensic medical certificate, the
confession or recognition of the police officer(s) who intervened
or eyewitnesses of the violent or coercive act.
The third assumption of admissibility is based on the conviction
handed down by virtue of the commission of crimes inherent to the
judicial function, crimes duly proven by means of an enforceable
sentence subsequent to the conviction sentence under review. For
example, if through a subsequent process with a final conviction,
it has been demonstrated that the judge, in hearing the case that
led to the criminal review, committed the crime of malfeasance,
active and passive bribery , delay or denial of justice, the
criminal review in favor of the convicted person due to the
aforementioned crimes committed by the judge.
The fourth assumption is closely related to new or pre-existing
facts or there are elements of evidence that conclusively
demonstrate that the convicted person has not committed the crime
for which he was tried and convicted, either because the crime
never existed or was not committed because the act in reality did
not take place, that the convicted person was not the author or
did not have any degree of participation in the crime and finally
it is demonstrated that the act is not criminally punishable with
deprivation of liberty , although it could have another type of
sentence that is not the deprivation of liberty. For this case,
the prerequisite of demonstration by means of an enforceable
sentence is not required, simply with demonstration of facts or
the presentation of conclusive evidence.
The fifth assumption of admissibility refers to the retroactive
application of a new criminal law that is more favorable or has
custodial sentences of lesser amounts than those applied in the
specific case to the convicted person, and the new amount and the
date of compliance with the new law must be established. sentence
applied. That due to a reform to the Penal Code or another new

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 8

Law that reduces or annuls the criminal type or the amount of the
custodial sentence of the criminal type that is the basis of the
final sentence under review, the criminal review action
corresponds.
Finally, the sixth assumption of admissibility refers to the
declaration, through a constitutional ruling pronounced by the
Constitutional Court, of the unconstitutionality of the norm or
criminal offense on which the conviction that is intended to be
reviewed was based.
Forms of the Criminal Review Sentence.-
The sentence handed down by the reviewing Court that resolves the
request for the criminal sentence may be in the following forms:
1.- Supreme Order annulling.
2.- Inadmissible supreme order.
The annulment Order can have two forms of resolution, the first
may be by annulling the sentence that is the reason for the
review by issuing the new sentence of absolution of guilt and
penalty.

The new sentence handed down by the reviewing Court and without
further appeal may declare acquittal or, where appropriate, the
extinction of the custodial sentence if it had been based on the
application of a new, more benign Law. In these cases, immediate
freedom will be ordered. of the unjustly convicted or
extinguished sentence.
If it had been by absolution of guilt and punishment, the same
sentence will provide for the immediate full rehabilitation of
all their fundamental individual rights, citizenship,
professional, labor, plus payment as compensation for the
economic, psychological and moral damage suffered during
throughout the time of his unjust deprivation of liberty, the
payment of procedural costs both for the annulled trial and for
the review action that must be attributed to the State and the
complaining party or his heirs, but the immediate return of the
pecuniary penalties paid and All property and objects were
confiscated.
Likewise, with the purpose of safeguarding and repairing the
dignity of the unjustly convicted, the sentence will provide for
the publication of the operative part of the sentence that

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 9

declared the acquittal in a mass media of national reach. The
right of the unjustly convicted person to sue against the State
and the complaining party for the economic, family, moral,
social, psychological and other damages that caused their unjust
conviction will remain open.
It should be noted that if the review court declares the request
for review inadmissible or inadmissible, as the case may be, the
convicted person may again request the review of his or her
conviction as many times as he or she sees appropriate and
necessary without restriction on the number of times he or she
wants to make use of it. This right or deadlines to try again, we
already said, is imprescriptible.

IN THE DOMINICAN LEGAL SYSTEM, IT IS NECESSARY TO ASK YOURSELF

THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS BEFORE CHALLENGING AN APPEAL FOR REVIEW,
SINCE THE RESULT OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE RESPONSES, THE APPEAL
FOR REVIEW WILL BE CORRECTLY BROUGHT BEFORE THE COMPETENT COURT.
FOR EXAMPLE:

WHAT ACTS CAN BE APPEALED IN REVIEW?

Final acts can be appealed administratively when any of the

following circumstances occur:
- That when the act was issued, a factual error was incurred,
resulting from the documents included in the file.
- That documents of essential value appear for the resolution of
the matter that, even if they are later, show the error of the
appealed resolution.
- That the resolution has been essentially influenced by
documents or testimonies declared false by a final judicial
ruling, prior or subsequent to that resolution.
- That the resolution had been issued as a consequence of
malfeasance, bribery, violence, fraudulent machination or other
punishable conduct and had been declared as such by virtue of a
final judicial ruling.

IN WHAT DEADLINES SHOULD THE APPEAL BE FILED?

The appeal must be filed within a period of 4 years following the

date of the contested resolution, when a factual error has been
incurred, resulting from the documents themselves included in the
file. In other cases, the period will be 3 months from the date
of knowledge of the documents or from the date when the court
ruling became final.

WITH WHOM IS THE APPEAL FILED AND WHERE IS IT FILED?

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 10
The appeal will be filed before the body that issued the act
being challenged. The appeal may be presented in any of the
registries of the General Administration of the State, of the
Autonomous Communities or of the Local Entities that are
signatories of the Single Window Agreement or by mail.

REVIEW REMEDY REQUIREMENTS

1.- That a final act be appealed through administrative means.

2.- That any of the following circumstances occur:
- That when the act was issued, a factual error was incurred,
resulting from the documents included in the file.
- That documents of essential value appear for the resolution of
the matter that, even if they are later, show the error of the
appealed resolution.
- That the resolution has been essentially influenced by
documents or testimonies declared false by a final judicial
ruling, prior or subsequent to that resolution.
- That the resolution had been issued as a consequence of
malfeasance, bribery, violence, fraudulent machination or other
punishable conduct and had been declared as such by virtue of a
final judicial ruling.
3.- That it be filed within the legally established deadlines.

DATA REQUIRED TO START THE PROCESSING

1.- Name and surname of the appellant, as well as his personal

identification.
2.- The act being appealed and the reason for its challenge.
3.- Place, date, signature of the appellant, identification of
the medium and, where appropriate, the place indicated for the
purposes of notifications.
4.- Body, center or administrative unit to which it is addressed.
5.- The other particularities required, where appropriate, by the
specific provisions.

WE HAD THE PLEASANT OPPORTUNITY TO FIND OUT AND INFORM

OURSELVES ABOUT EVERYTHING RELATING TO THE REVIEW
REMEDY, WE SAW EVERY STEP THAT SHOULD BE USED WHEN
CHALLENGING SOMEONE AND KNOWING THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 11

FOR THOSE CONVICTED STILL CLAIM JUSTICE, WE HOPE TO
HAVE FILLED THE REQUIREMENTS REQUIRED OF EVERY READER
AND WE HOPE THAT THIS WORK IS OF GREAT HELP, WITHOUT
ANY OTHER PARTICULAR THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION.

 ESPASA CALPE ENCYCLOPEDIC DICTIONARY, EDITORIAL

SANTIAGO LTDA. COCHRANÉ, 1997.

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 12

  OSSORIO, MANUEL, CABANELLAS DE LAS CUEVAS,
GUILLERMO, DICTIONARY OF LEGAL, POLITICAL AND
SOCIAL SCIENCES , 23RD EDITION, EDITORIAL HELIASTA,
BUENOS AIRES , 1996.

 DOMINICAN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, LAW 76-02

 WWW.PODER JUDICIAL.COM.DO

 WWW.GOOGLE.COM.DO

DOMINICAN REVIEW RESOURCE Page 13