Probation Service qualifies as procedural subject in appeals against revocation of suspended sentence
Romania (RO)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe High Court of Cassation and Justice, acting as the Full Bench for Resolving Questions of Law in Criminal Matters, upheld the referral from the Craiova Court of Appeal and established a binding legal interpretation regarding criminal procedure. The dispute concerned whether the Probation Service qualifies as a procedural subject to whom an appealed decision refers, specifically within the context of revoking the suspension of a sentence under probationary supervision. The court ruled that the Probation Service is indeed a procedural subject under Article 4251(2) first sentence of the Code of Criminal Procedure, read in conjunction with Article 34 final sentence and Article 29, which define procedural subjects and participants in criminal proceedings. This uniform interpretation is mandatory from the date of publication in the Official Monitor and resolves the conflict over the standing of the Probation Service in appeals concerning the revocation of suspended sentences.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedart. 4251 alin. (2) teza I din Codul de procedură penală, art. 34 teza finală din acelaşi cod, art. 583 din Codul de procedură penală, art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală; Probation Service qualifies as procedural subject in appeals against revocation of suspended sentence: The dispute concerned whether the Probation Service qualifies as a procedural subject to whom an appealed decision refers, specifically within the context of revoking the suspension of a sentence under probationary supervision. The court ruled that the Probation Service is indeed a procedural subject under Article 4251(2) first sentence of the Code of Criminal Procedure, read in conjunction with Article 34 final sentence and Article 29, which define procedural subjects and participants in criminal proceedings. This uniform interpretation is mandatory from the date of publication in the Official Monitor and resolves the conflict over the standing of the Probation Service in appeals concerning the revocation of suspended sentences.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedKey legal questions extracted by Legislator
AI generatedMain ground for the ruling, defining the scope of the preliminary question regarding which subjects are affected by the contested decision.
Procedural rule cited in the dispositive to define the status of the probation service as a party to the proceedings.
Substantive provision cited in the dispositive to establish the context of revoking suspended execution under supervision.
Provision cited in the dispositive regarding the mandatory nature and publication of the decision.
Full text
R O M Â N I A
ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE
COMPLETUL PENTRU DEZLEGAREA UNOR CHESTIUNI DE DREPT ÎN MATERIE PENALĂ
Minuta deciziei nr. 16 Dosar nr. 1449/1/2019
Şedinţa din data de 24 septembrie 2019
ÎN NUMELE LEGII
D E C I D E:
Admite sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Craiova, Secţia Penală şi pentru Cauze cu Minori, în dosarul nr. 2615/101/2018, prin care se solicită pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept: „Dacă Serviciul de Probaţiune face parte din categoria subiecţilor procesuali la care hotărârea atacată se referă, în sensul art. 4251 alin. (2) din Codul de procedură penală raportat la art. 34 din Codul de procedură penală, cu aplicarea art. 29 din Codul de procedură penală care definesc noţiunea de subiect procesual şi respectiv de participant la procesul penal.”
Stabileşte că în cadrul procedurii de revocare a suspendării executării pedepsei sub supraveghere, prevăzută de art. 583 din Codul de procedură penală, serviciul de probaţiune este un subiect procesual la care hotărârea atacată se referă, în accepţiunea art. 4251 alin. (2) teza I din Codul de procedură penală raportat la art. 34 teza finală din acelaşi cod.
Obligatorie de la data publicării în Monitorul Oficial al României, Partea I, potrivit art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală.
Pronunţată în şedinţă publică astăzi, 24 septembrie 2019.