The Alicante Court appointed a first magistrate to oversee the renewed trial concerning the murder of María del Carmen Martínez, but this magistrate recused himself. Judge José Maria Merlos, who had previously served in the same case and is the person responsible for presiding over the new popular court, abstained from judging again due to his prior involvement. This abstention prevents him from presiding over the restructured proceedings involving Miguel Lopez, the main defendant in the case.
Merlos informed the Civil and Criminal Division of his decision to step back. The Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) has a ten-day window to determine whether to accept the arguments presented by the magistrate. The ruling is not subject to appeal, even if the parties later challenge the refusal.
As this outlet previously noted, Merlos intervened twice in the process. In the initial instance, he was part of the court that reviewed the appeal against a prior decision. López has served a prison term for these facts, with the sentence handed down by the presiding trainer; at the last moment, López’s lead defense attorney, José Antonio García, withdrew from the case.
Subsequently, and in relation to López’s detention status, the former president of CAM, Vicente Sala, was a member of the court that dismissed the appeal on López’s release under the authority of the special prosecutor. The defense attorney Francisco Ruiz Marco was the sole proponent of this resource. Serious procedural mistakes occurred in the final phase of the trial, prompting the Supreme Court to annul the acquittal and order a retrial with a different magistrate and jury.
During the first oral hearing, the court convicted López by seven votes to two, but Judge Francisca Bru was sent back for alleged lack of motivation that the parties could not rectify. The court did not permit access to a recording, which was later destroyed.
Two of the reasons for canceling one of the two hearings required by the Jury Law to resume the verdict and retry the case involved the participation of a speaker, Manuel Marchena, and a special vote by Andrew Palomo. A magistrate who does not deny the irregularities maintains that they do not invalidate the verdict, a view the TSJ supported in upholding the acquittal originally issued by the Alicante Court.
Two figures accompanying the case, Judge Francisca Bru and LAJ Manuel Cerdán, were present at the first hearing of the Sala trial. The proceedings concluded that an unidentified person executed María del Carmen Martínez by firing two bullets into her head while she approached the car at the automotive business in Salas, managed by the suspect, on the afternoon of December 9, 2016, who chose not to testify.
Public and private prosecutors sought around 25 years in prison for López for murder and illegal weapon possession. The initial verdict and its subsequent replacement, due to jury indecision, resulted in a six-to-three verdict in favor of forgiveness after replacement by the substitute jurors.
Merlos’ resignation letter is accompanied by case-law illustrating prior interventions and how, depending on their relevance, those interventions could affect the magistrate’s participation or influence prosecutions in ongoing matters. For the moment, and pending TSJ’s decision on the rejection, the default remains in effect without immediate disruption; deadlines are paused. If Merlos’ arguments are accepted, the next magistrate on the list will be appointed to continue the proceedings.