Basis: Article 116 TUO-LOPJ Subject: Chain of custody Legal effects of its violation b) The violation of the chain of custody is not a problem of illegality of the evidence determining its deactivation of the “procedural sanction in relation to the prohibited evidence”, since it does not violate the constitutionally guaranteed content of a fundamental or constitutional right (Article VIII, provisional title and Article 159 of the NCPP). Nor can goods, objects or objects relating to the infringement presented as substantial evidence in the absence of a chain of custody or in the event of a breach of the chain of custody be regarded as scandalous evidence or prohibited by law (Article 155(2) NCPP). The chain of custody must ensure the integrity of the evidence from the moment of collection, as this evidence may eventually become evidence whose legality must be guaranteed so that it can be discussed at trial. 13 ° The rupture of the chain of traceability – the presence of irregularities in its course” occurs when, in one of the links of the chain or sections through which the body of the crime is transported, the guarantee of identity between what is seized and what is given to the prosecutor, to the technical experts, © is lost, to the forensic laboratories, Universities, public or private institutions, research institutes (Article 173(2) NCPP) or a judge. Angulo Arana explains that “the chain of custody is a procedure established by law with the aim of ensuring the integrity, preservation and immutability of physical evidence such as documents, samples (organic and inorganic), firearms, projectiles, vanilla, knives, narcotics and their derivatives, etc.; be provided by the competent authority to criminal or forensic laboratories for analysis and obtain, by experts, technicians or scientists, an expert concept”[11]. Therefore: “If in an act of blood and dinner is the instrument of crime, this instrument used by the perpetrator, since the fact has been verified and is found, already regulates the chain of custody”[12]. Manuel Restro emphasizes the important role that the chain of custody plays with respect to “the material elements of the crime and physical evidence, and lies in the fact that these prove the commission of a crime, associate the suspect with the victim or the scene of the crime, identify the persons associated with the crime, confirm the testimony of a victim, Define how the abuser works and link cases to each other or exonerate an innocent person. Moreover, it is more reliable and objective than testimonials, and the development of science has made it more important. [9] In addition, the Supreme Court of Costa Rica recalls that “[¦] the chain of custody does not protect the quantity or quality of physical evidence, but its identity, since the seizure must be the same as that which reaches the expert and the debate” [Third Chamber, judgment of the twenty-first December of two thousand seven]. But there will always be common aspects in the definitions, so most tend to refer to the chain of custody, taking into account the following aspects: crime, trial, evidence, chain of custody, due process.

[19] Article 326: If the accused offence has left traces or material evidence of its commission, the investigating judge or the person who replaces him orders that they be collected and preserved, as far as possible, for the oral proceedings, with the conduct of the eye inspection and the description of everything that may be related to the existence and nature of the fact. To that end, it shall record in the file a description of the place of the offence, the place and condition of the objects therein, the accidents on the premises or the location of the premises and any other information that may be used for both prosecution and defence. If the presence of traces or traces is detected, the biological analysis of which could help to clarify the facts examined, the investigating judge will instruct the criminal police or the coroner to take the necessary measures to verify the collection, preservation and examination of these samples under conditions guaranteeing their authenticity. without prejudice to Article 282 of the Law on Criminal Procedure, Royal Decree of 14 September 1882. The fourth is the expert` report, in which the expert declares that what is being analyzed is authentic©, that it is the same good, thing or object that he received (the precedent and this can be called “witnesses” or “accreditation experts” as the case may be). The last is the chain of custody [MORA IZQUIERDO et al., 2007:195-198]. [7] Teaching Module: Legal Basis for Investigation and Chain of Custody. Taught by José Luis Leiva Muñoz, Prosecutor of the Supreme Court, Andalusia Spain.

5 – 16 May 2008 Tegucigalpa. Located in URL. Accessed December 27, 2010. 12 ° The mechanism for the expression of the chain of custody is established by means©of forms for recording information or, as provided for in the above-mentioned regulation, in “chain of custody formats” that accompany the infringement at all times and are controlled by the Public Prosecutor`s Office or a designated official± substantially specified. Each link in the chain of custody is properly recorded and uninterrupted, showing how far the body of the crime has come. In the event of modification or imitation of one of these phases or phases, we would be faced with the absence of legality of the evidence to be used in criminal proceedings, which could lead to erroneous procedural activity or de facto nullity, since the elements discussed and analysed would have no probative value. Violation of the principle of legality of procedural acts, which must exist throughout the criminal proceedings. [15] Article 205: Activities of the criminal police in the context of investigations and investigations. Officers who, in the performance of their criminal police duties, receive complaints, complaints or reports of any other nature from which the possible commission of a criminal offence arises, must immediately take all urgent measures, such as crime scene inspection, body inspection, interrogation and interrogation.