dated November 14, 2005, the petitioner asked the State to commute the sentence of Lucas Matías Mendoza. The petitioners stress that although the State made a commitment to work towards the commutation of the sentence, nothing has been accomplished. Saúl Cristián Roldán Cajal 57. The petition on behalf of Saúl Cristian Roldán Cajal was filed with the IACHR on July 7, 2003. The petition argues that the alleged victim was tried for the crimes of aggravated robbery in conjunction with aggravated homicide, committed before he was 18 years of age. On November 6, 2000, the Juvenile Criminal Court of Mendoza found Saúl Cristian Roldán Cajal to be criminally liable and brought the matter before the Juvenile Prosecutor of the Public Ministry, which requested a sentence of 20 years in prison. On March 8, 2002, the court made a decision on the sentence to be imposed on young Roldán, and condemned him to life imprisonment, based on law 22,278. 58. The court-appointed defense attorney of young Roldán filed a motion for cassation based on the arbitrary nature of the sentence and its violation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. The petitioners report that on August 5, 2002, Courtroom II of the Supreme Court of Mendoza Province ruled that the motion for cassation was inadmissible because the defense was using it to seek a review of matters of fact and evidence, and that the trial court had stated the reasons for its decision in the whereas clauses of its decision. The petitioners assert that young Roldán Cajal was not informed of this ruling until June 18, 2003, and thus lost the opportunity to file any further appeals within the domestic jurisdiction. Ricardo David Videla Fernández 59. The petitioners state that the alleged victim was tried for the following crimes, committed between June 5, 2001 and July 12, 2002: armed robbery at sites in the city of Mendoza, and 2 aggravated homicides. He was additionally accused of illegal possession of weapons of war, aggravated coercion, and illegally carrying a weapon for civilian use. On November 28, 2002, pursuant to law 22,278, he was sentenced by the Oral Juvenile Criminal Court of the First Judicial Circuit of Mendoza to life in prison. 60. The defense attorney of young Videla filed a motion of cassation against the conviction from the trial court, arguing erroneous application of the law in determining the sentence. The Supreme Court of Mendoza denied the motion, arguing that the defense was seeking a review of matters of fact and evidence, which are the exclusive rights of the court which tried the case. In response to that decision, the defense attorney filed a special federal appeal, which was also denied by the Supreme Court of Mendoza under the argument that the challenge was merely a dissent with the court’s opinion in terms of compliance with the formal requirements of the motion for cassation. Finally, a motion based on improper denial of an appeal was filed with the National Supreme Court, which was denied in a decision dated October 13, 2003 for procedural reasons. That decision was notified on the 16th of that month. 61. In the additional information received on June 23, 2005 from both the petitioners and the State, the Commission learned of the death of young Ricardo David Videla Fernández in a possible suicide in his cell at the Mendoza Penitentiary. The petitioners state that the circumstances of the death have not yet been clarified.