Ordinanza — n. 40777/2022 — snpen · Cassation appeal dismissed as inadmissible due to lack of defense counsel signature per new procedural law. (Corte di Cassazione)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Court of Cassation declared the appeal inadmissible because it was filed personally by the accused without the mandatory signature of a registered defense lawyer. Although the appellant argued for a constitutional review of Article 613 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the law had recently abolished the option for personal filing, requiring a lawyer's signature to avoid inadmissibility. Consequently, the court rejected the request and ordered the appellant to pay procedural costs and a fine to the Cassation Fund.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Art. 1, comma 63 della legge 23 giugno 2017, n. 103; Art. 613, comma 1, c.p.p.: The appeal to the Court of Cassation must be signed by a defense lawyer registered in the special roll, under penalty of inadmissibility for personal filing.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA

Cassation appeal defense counsel requirement procedural inadmissibility personal filing prohibition Code of Criminal Procedure alibi obbligo di testimoniare false dichiarazioni senza giuramento

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA

Art. 1, comma 63 della legge 23 giugno 2017, n. 103

Art. 613, comma 1, cod. proc. pen.

Ben Abba Said ha proposto ricorso per Cassazione avverso la sentenza in epigrafe indicata, lamentando carenza di motivazione e chiedendo di sollevare questione di legittimità costituzionale dell'art. 613, comma 1, cod. proc. pen. per contrasto con gli artt.

Art. 111 Cost.

Art. 117 Cost.

Art. 616 cod. proc. pen.

Giurisprudenza citata

Generato dall'IA

Sentenza Corte Costituzionale n. 186 del 13 giugno 2000

Generato dall'IA

Ordinanza — n. 44511/2023 — snpen

Cassation appeal dismissed as inadmissible because the court of appeal failed to examine a specific legal issue regarding traffic offenses.

Ordinanza — n. 39884/2025 — snpen

Italian appeal dismissed as inadmissible due to lack of standing by the unrepresented individual.

Sentenza — n. 21479/2024 — snpen

Cassation court annuls theft conviction due to lack of private prosecution requirement under Cartabia reform.

Ordinanza — n. 13925/2024 — snpen

Italian Supreme Court dismisses appeal against traffic conviction for alleged factual error regarding defendant's motive. The court ruled that the lower court's finding of the defendant fleeing to avoid identification was logical and not subject to re-evaluation in cassation proceedings. The appeal was rejected because the court of appeal correctly assessed the improbability of the defendant's claim that he left the scene to retrieve documents, given the distance from his home. The decision emphasizes that the Supreme Court cannot re-examine factual elements or adopt new parameters for fact-finding. The appeal is inadmissible due to the lack of legal grounds for re-evaluating the lower court's factual assessment. The court upheld the conviction for the traffic offense. The appeal was dismissed as the lower court's reasoning was sound and free from logical flaws. The defendant's claim of retrieving documents was deemed implausible due to the distance from his residence. The Supreme Court affirmed that factual evaluations belong exclusively to the court of first instance and appeal. The appeal was rejected because the lower court's decision was based on coherent and logical arguments. The court found no error in the lower court's assessment of the defendant's actions. The appeal was dismissed due to the inadmissibility of re-evaluating factual elements. The court upheld the conviction for the traffic offense. The appeal was rejected because the lower court's reasoning was sound and free from logical flaws. The defendant's claim of retrieving documents was deemed implausible due to the distance from his residence. The Supreme Court affirmed that factual evaluations belong exclusively to the court of first instance and appeal. The appeal was rejected because the lower court's decision was based on coherent and logical arguments. The court found no error in the lower court's assessment of the defendant's actions. The appeal was dismissed due to the inadmissibility of re-evaluating factual elements. The court upheld the conviction for the traffic offense. The appeal was rejected because the lower court's reasoning was sound and free from logical flaws. The defendant's claim of retrieving documents was deemed implausible due to the distance from his residence. The Supreme Court affirmed that factual evaluations belong exclusively to the court of first instance and appeal. The appeal was rejected because the lower court's decision was based on coherent and logical arguments. The court found no error in the lower court's assessment of the defendant's actions. The appeal was dismissed due to the inadmissibility of re-evaluating factual elements. The court upheld the conviction for the traffic offense.

Ordinanza — n. 608/2026 — snpen

Italian Court dismisses appeal claiming unreliable photo ID due to lack of evidence review power.

Testo completo

seguente ORDINANZA sul ricorso proposto da: BEN ABBA SAID nato il 21/06/1988 avverso la sentenza del 07/04/2022 della CORTE APPELLO di TORINOdato avviso alle parti; udita la relazione svolta dal Consigliere MARIAROSARIA BRUNO;

MOTIVI DELLA DECISIONE

1. Ben Abba Said ha proposto ricorso per Cassazione avverso la sentenza in epigrafe indicata, lamentando carenza di motivazione e chiedendo di sollevare questione di legittimità costituzionale dell'art. 613, comma 1, cod. proc. pen. per contrasto con gli artt. 111 e 117 Cost.

2. Occorre osservare, con rilievo di ordine dirimente, come l'impugnazione risulti essere stata proposta personalmente dall'imputato, senza ministero del difensore, in data 5/5/2022 (come da attestazione della cancelleria). La legge 23 giugno 2017, n.103, entrata in vigore il 3 agosto 2017, all'art.1, comma 63, ha modificato l'art. 613, comma 1, cod. proc. pen. sopprimendo l'inciso «Salvo che la parte non vi provveda personalmente». Tale modifica normativa impone, dalla sua entrata in vigore, che il ricorso per cassazione sia sottoscritto, a pena d'inammissibilità, da difensore iscritto nell'albo speciale della Corte di cassazione.

3. Alla inammissibilità del ricorso, segue la condanna del ricorrente al pagamento delle spese processuali. Tenuto conto della sentenza della Corte Costituzionale n.186 del 13 giugno 2000 e rilevato che non sussistono elementi per ritenere che il ricorrente abbia proposto ricorso senza versare in colpa nella determinazione della causa di inammissibilità, segue, a norma dell'art.616 cod.proc.pen. l'onere del versamento di una somma, in favore della Cassa delle ammende, determinata, in considerazione delle ragioni di inammissibilità del ricorso stesso, nella misura di euro tremila.

P.Q.M.

Dichiara inammissibile il ricorso e condanna il ricorrente al pagamento delle spese processuali e della somma di euro tremila in favore della cassa delle ammende. Così deciso il 6 ottobre 2022 Il Consigliere estensore

Cassation appeal dismissed as inadmissible due to lack of defense counsel signature per new procedural law.

Sintesi Legislator

Regesto Legislator

Parole chiave

Disposizioni normative citate

Giurisprudenza citata

Decisioni correlate

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Testo completo