A court in Alicante handed down a sentence of one month and fifteen days of imprisonment to a man linked to a drug case in Aspe. The prosecution’s drama began when a neighbor was arrested for retail drug trafficking, and four other defendants were acquitted during the proceedings that followed. Authorities intervened in a property listing that included a marijuana plantation, shotguns, and various quantities of cannabis. The searches were conducted after the convicted individual confessed to the Civil Guard, and investigators later traced a drug source to a house in Alicante. Four defendants, previously acquitted in the same case, faced new charges and potential sentences of up to four years in prison. The defense was led by lawyer José Soler Martín. [Citation: Alicante 4th High Criminal Court sentence details]
The factual matrix, whose evidentiary basis was laid bare in a recent ruling by the 4th High Criminal Court of Alicante, goes back to January 16, 2017. In that phase, one defendant received a sentence of 45 days in prison, which was later converted into a fine of 270 euros. He had been arrested by Civil Guard officers on Aspe Street in Cuevas Cipreses, where prosecutors alleged a plan to sell hashish and cannabis in a retail fashion. The court noted the role of the accused in the broader network, and the subsequent investigation identified another individual as the person who carried out the activities from the outset. This other defendant was also linked to threats aimed at maintaining the drug operation. The same dossier pointed to the involvement of marijuana and cocaine, painting a more complete picture of the illicit scheme.
The day after this initial arrest, the Court of First Instance and Instruction No. 3 of Novelda issued a decree permitting the entry and search of two properties in Aspe. The order, however, was deemed invalid, and as a consequence, four people who had been arrested based on evidence gathered at those residences were ultimately acquitted. The verdict stressed that there was no proven evidence showing that any of the defendants possessed a valid driver’s license, that cannabis cultivation occurred, or that there existed any link to illegal power-grid connections. In addition, the court found no proof that one of the defendants possessed two shotguns, and it noted that he did not hold a gun license or authorization.
Alicante No. 4 Assize Court accepted the annulment of the recordings at the request of the defenses and observed that if an investigation had already taken place, the agent involved in the case had not documented it in the record; the analysis proceeded on the merits rather than on a complete evidentiary trail. The detainee’s testimony appeared to be insufficient to sustain a robust evidentiary base, rendering the record lean and underscoring the necessity of corroborating environmental verification. These observations underscored the court’s cautious approach to evidence gathered in the field and highlighted the need for a well-supported factual scaffold before imposing penalties.
The sentence further noted that environmental verification would run counter to the interests of the person previously convicted, as the agent had indicated that movements were monitored while individuals attended poker games or cockfights at residences under surveillance. This emphasis on real-time observation and the limitations of testimony from a single source reflected the court’s insistence on minimizing speculative conclusions when evaluating criminal activity tied to drug distribution networks.
Beyond the four-year imprisonment possibility for some co-defendants, prosecutors sought fines and compensation to Iberdrola for alleged electricity fraud tied to the case. The total claimed amount reached 67,000 euros for damages arising from an alleged illegal electrical connection, a figure the court weighed as part of the broader sanctioning framework. The case thus wove together penalties for drug-related offenses with financial restitution demands tied to utility infrastructure, illustrating the complexity of multi-defendant prosecutions in municipal and regional courts.