De Guzman Sánchez, Alberto NiñoFlores Castillo, Adrian BryanZumaeta Freire, Kaira Silene2023-07-312023-07-312021-02-12http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14503/2507Las proposiciones formuladas, han sido evaluadas por una muestra representativa de abogados en actividad y magistrados en materia penal constitucional, cuyos resultados empíricos a la problemática planteada: ¿cuál es el fundamento para determinar que la pena no cumple su finalidad constitucional efectiva en los sentenciados con sentencia suspendida, en los juzgados unipersonales de la Corte Superior de Justicia de Loreto, durante el año 2021?. De lo recabado no ocurre así, esto significa que la pena no cumple su finalidad constitucional efectiva, en los sentenciados con sentencia suspendida, en los juzgados unipersonales de la Corte Superior de Justicia de Loreto. La principal metodología fueron la observación sistemática de hechos ocurridos en juzgados penales unipersonales, tomadas del cuestionario y entrevistas a los jueces y fiscales en materia penal, corroboradas por la muestra estudiada. Al contradecir la hipótesis alternativa, queda aceptada las hipótesis principales, así como auxiliares en toda su extensión, así lo visualizamos en el cuadro general Nº 01 y ss del acápite 4.2 de esta tesis.The proposals made have been evaluated by a representative sample of active lawyers and magistrates in constitutional criminal matters, whose empirical results to the problem raised: what is the basis for determining that the penalty does not fulfill its effective constitutional purpose in those sentenced with sentence suspended, in the single-person courts of the Superior Court of Justice of Loreto, during the year 2021? From what is collected, this does not occur, this means that the sentence does not fulfill its effective constitutional purpose, in those sentenced with a suspended sentence, in the one-person courts of the Superior Court of Justice of Loreto. The main methodology was the systematic observation of events that occurred in one-person criminal courts, taken from the questionnaire and interviews with judges and prosecutors in criminal matters, corroborated by the sample studied. By contradicting the alternative hypothesis, the main hypotheses are accepted, as well as auxiliary ones in their entirety, as we visualize it in the general table No. 01 and ss of section 4.2 of this thesis.application/pdfspainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/El proceso penalEl derecho penal como control socialLa penaThe criminal processCriminal law as social controlThe penaltyinfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesishttps://purl.org/pe-repo/ocde/ford#5.05.01