and that of the victim, obtaining maps and ownership documents from the parties in dispute, and inspecting the site. 289. The Court considers that the filing of a criminal complaint requires the entity conducting the investigation to take all those actions and make all those inquiries that are required to achieve the result sought within a reasonable time. 310 However, the Court understands that even though, based on the information collected during the initial actions, the entity in charge of the investigation could decide not to continue the investigation if it found this to be appropriate, it is essential that it execute the minimum procedures that will allow it to have sufficient information concerning the presumed perpetration of an offense. According to the evidence in the case file, the Court has verified that, in the instant case, the property titles issued to the Punta Piedra community were obtained, but no other procedure was conducted by the corresponding authorities to gather minimum information about what happened. 290. Accordingly, the Court notes that the State did not take any relevant measure to clarify the facts and punish those responsible. Therefore, 11 years after the usurpation complaint was filed, the State has not ruled on it, in violation of the principles of due diligence and reasonable time. Also, even though Félix Ordóñez Suazo died in June 2007, the Court has no additional and updated information regarding the status of the land usurpation complaint following his death 311 and notes that this complaint was not joined to the investigations conducted as a result of his death. B.2.1.2 Investigations and criminal proceedings in relation to the death of Félix Ordóñez Suazo 291. The Court has established that Félix Ordóñez Suazo died on June 11, 2007, between 7.30 and 11.00 a.m., as a result of three bullets wounds (supra para. 137). According to statements by the only witness to the crime, the presumed perpetrator was David Portillo Chacón, the son of Luis Portillo – Félix Ordóñez Suazo having accused the latter of land usurpation in 2003 (supra paras. 133, 138 and 139). The Court notes that, as a result of this, two complaints were filed and an investigation and criminal proceedings were initiated to clarify the facts and punish those responsible; however, this is still at the investigation stage. Consequently, based on the arguments of the Commission and the parties, the Court will analyze: (a) the presumed omissions in the initial investigation procedures, and (b) the presumed irregularities in the criminal proceedings and the reasonable time. 292. Regarding the initial procedures, the Court has established that, in the context of the obligation to investigate a death, a real determination to discover the truth with due diligence should be demonstrated as of the initial procedures. 312 Also, regarding Cf.. Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters, supra, para 65 and 83, and Case of Espinoza Gonzáles, supra, para. 238 and 290. 311 It is on record that on September 10, 2014, during the investigation into his death, the Trujillo Prosecutor received an official letter from the Ethnic Affairs Prosecutor requesting information on the progress and actual status of the land usurpation complaint. The Court’s case file does not reveal that he received any response to this request. 312 Cf. Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez v. Honduras. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of June 7, 2003. Series C No.99. para. 127, and Case of the Human Rights Defender et al., supra, para 204. In this regard, the Court has established the guidelines that must be observed in an investigation into a violent death. The State authorities who conduct an investigation of this type must, at least, inter alia: (i) identify the victim; (ii) recover and preserve evidentiary material related to the death to aid in any possible criminal investigation of those responsible; (iii) identify possible witnesses and obtain 310 82