Supreme Court acquits a thief in Alicante for accessing his medical data without a warrant

No time to read?
Get a summary

This Supreme Court (TS) cancelled 9 years in prison prison sentence by Court of Alicante for a man violent robberies in the Community of Valencia Civil Guard accepted without your consent or court orderto them medical dataIt was decisive in the discovery of his identity and his arrest.

The man was convicted by the Alicante Court of using violence, using weapons and aggravating disguise and recidivism in a residential home; another forced robbery and several injuries in a sentence later upheld by the High Court of Justice of the Commonwealth of Valencia (TSJCV) for which they were prosecuted. three more were sentenced For robberies in different parts of the Community since late 2019 and early 2020.

Wounded

In one of these robberies, the now acquitted person was injured in a clash with one of the homeowners, and the Security Guard, aware that one of the alleged perpetrators might be injured, carried out the robbery. “hospital procedures” and accepted the appellant’s medical report; done without your permission and without a court order.

The convicted person therefore denied its constitutional invalidity and, unlike the Alicante Court and the TSJ, the Supreme Court agrees with him and declares that authorization must be obtained from the patient or a judge for the collection of non-anonymized medical data. It is intended for use in an investigation.

required authorization

It does not object to the transferability of this anonymized data. health centers within the framework of an investigation, however, this authority must exist and also be specifically for a particular procedure.

they explain judges Among the information available to the agents was how the injuries had occurred: the appellant reported that he had been hit in the shoulder with a mace and was subsequently involved in a car accident; the confrontation with one of the victims of a robbery and the location of the crashed car from which they escaped.

Information that, according to the Supreme Court’s decision, which dismissed the appeal of another defendant, sentenced to 25 years in prison, placed responsibility for the robbery on him, and information that the investigation could not obtain in any other way. prison.

No time to read?
Get a summary
Previous Article

Generalitat increases its contribution to Benidorm Fest to 1.5 million

Next Article

The Athletic places Bure 36th in NHL history