The Supreme Court (TS) has acquitted an individual from Arona (Tenerife) who was previously convicted of falsifying an official document related to car registration. The defendant, a foreign national with limited understanding of Spanish and an 80% disability, presented new evidence to support his innocence.
Following the presentation of new evidence by the defendant’s lawyers, the Supreme Court revisited the case and ultimately overturned the previous conviction made by the Arona Court.
The individual was apprehended in early 2023 while driving a vehicle registered under the previous owner’s name. This led the police to suspect that he deliberately tampered with the license plate.
Moreover, the car displayed a badge from the German county of Regensburg and a Technical Vehicle Inspection (ITV) certificate.
However, the defense later proved that the defendant had received the car by sea from the previous owner, retaining the same license plates. This evidence invalidated the accusation of manipulation made at the time of his arrest.
During the Supreme Court proceedings, the defendant’s legal team presented a purchase and sale agreement worth 2,700 euros, a Tenerife Commercial Registry certificate, and a temporary import document, all of which corroborated the legitimacy of the registration.
In the initial trial in Arona, the defendant accepted a guilty verdict, resulting in a four-month prison sentence and a fine of 600 euros. His lawyers argued that he did not comprehend the verdict as he was not fluent in Spanish.
Due to the tight deadlines, the exonerating documents could not be submitted in time, revealing that the vehicle had been legally imported to the Canary Islands with the same license plate.
The Prosecutor’s Office also supported the defendant’s innocence plea and backed the reconsideration of the case by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court emphasised that sentence reviews are rare and must clearly demonstrate the defendant’s innocence beyond doubt, thus warranting a reversal of the initial verdict.
Interestingly, an error was identified in the Supreme Court’s order for review, which wrongly stated the original court location as Ceuta instead of Seville. Additionally, there was a mistake in identifying the German county from which the car was imported.
