Based on the judgment within a direct procedure, a critical legal analysis has been conducted due to a clear breach of the guarantee of an impartial judge. Hence, the legal proposal is originated. According to the rules within the direct procedure, the defendants are apprehended and presented before the judge of the Criminal Guarantees Unit to conduct the hearing for the qualification of flagrancy. Subsequently, within twenty days, the same judge must carry out the trial hearing. Therefore, there is a prejudiced judge within the process because that judge is aware of the events and convictions revealed during the flagrancy hearing, and that judge has a formed opinion about the case, which violates the guarantee recognized in the 2008 Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador, specifically in Article 76, literal k. It is established that we all must be judged by an independent, impartial, and competent judge. Hence, within the direct procedure, there is a need to provide an alternative solution, and it is important to fulfill this guarantee by appointing another judge from the same Criminal Guarantees Unit to preside over the trial hearing.