Cassation court dismisses appeal claiming lack of recidivism exclusion as merely repetitive of lower court's valid reasoning.

The Court of Cassation declared the appeal inadmissible, ruling that the appellant's claim regarding the exclusion of recidivism was merely a repetition of arguments already properly addressed by the lower court. The appellate court had correctly identified the appellant's specific prior convictions for robbery and resistance to a public official as evidence of a persistent criminal tendency. Consequently, the court upheld the conviction for drug possession and resistance, rejecting the procedural defect argument as unfounded.