The Second Superior Prosecutor's Office for Money Laundering, led by
, as part of the ongoing investigation into alleged offenses of criminal organization and money laundering.
This decision reaffirms the strength of the arguments presented by the Prosecutor's Office, which justified the need for the coercive measure due to the defendant's repeated failure to comply with the rules of conduct, as well as the risk of flight demonstrated by his prolonged absence from court summonses.
The defendant sought to overturn the restrictive measure, arguing that the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court had annulled his convictions in the Wanka Aerodrome and La Oroya cases, and that, therefore, his freedom no longer posed a danger.
However, the judicial body assessed the arguments presented by the Public Ministry (Prosecutor's Office), stating that the rulings issued by other judicial bodies have no bearing on the current money laundering proceedings, which are still in the preliminary investigation stage.
In that regard, it was emphasized that those rulings do not eliminate the elements that justify pretrial detention.
Therefore, the request filed by Vladimir Cerron to replace pretrial detention with restricted appearance was declared unfounded at the appellate level.