Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Decizia nr. 4796/2004 AI generated

Appeal over withdrawn sentence-suspension request dismissed as unfounded; appellant liable for judicial costs.

Case Number Decizia nr. 4796/2004
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Court Costs Borne by appellant
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Romanian High Court of Cassation and Justice (Criminal Section) dismissed as unfounded the convicted person’s appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision, which had upheld the trial court’s ruling taking note of the withdrawal of the request for suspension of sentence execution; the dismissal is final, and the appellant was ordered to pay 800,000 lei in judicial costs (with 200,000 lei for court-appointed counsel advanced from the Justice Ministry’s fund). The case concerned a convicted individual’s request under Article 453(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code to suspend execution of a sentence, filed in February 2004, which the appellant later withdrew before the trial court, leading the Court of Appeal to reject his appeal as the withdrawal was effective. The decisive legal basis was Article 453(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which lists the prosecutor, the convicted person, and other specified persons as entitled to file the request, and allows the convicted person, as the titular holder, to withdraw it at any time; since the prosecutor had not adopted the request, the lower courts correctly took note of the withdrawal and did not proceed with the merits.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 453 lit. a) C. proc. pen, art. 453 alin. (2) C. proc. pen, art. 38515 pct. 1 lit. b) C. proc. pen; Appeal over withdrawn sentence-suspension request dismissed as unfounded; appellant liable for judicial costs: The case concerned a convicted individual’s request under Article 453(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code to suspend execution of a sentence, filed in February 2004, which the appellant later withdrew before the trial court, leading the Court of Appeal to reject his appeal as the withdrawal was effective. The decisive legal basis was Article 453(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which lists the prosecutor, the convicted person, and other specified persons as entitled to file the request, and allows the convicted person, as the titular holder, to withdraw it at any time; since the prosecutor had not adopted the request, the lower courts correctly took note of the withdrawal and did not proceed with the merits.

Keywords

AI generated
suspended sentence court-appointed legal counsel request to proceed with execution code of criminal procedure withdrawal of criminal complaint legal aid costs

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 453 lit. a) C. proc. pen
Împotriva sentinței, a declarat apel, reiterând cererea de întrerupere a executării pedepsei în condițiile art. 453 lit. a) C. proc. pen.
art. 453 alin. (2) C. proc. pen
Conform art. 453 alin. (2) C. proc. pen., titularul cererii este procurorul, condamnatul și persoanele arătate la art.
art. 38515 pct. 1 lit. b) C. proc. pen
Basis for rejecting the appeal as unfounded, constituting the main ground for the verdict.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 562/2004
Withdrawal of appeal upheld; prison sentence suspension refusal stands, costs imposed.
Decizia nr. 5833/2006
Withdrawal of appeal upheld exclusion of sentence-suspension request grounded in unsubstantiated family hardship; appellant liable for 100 lei costs.
Decizia nr. 597/2005
Prisoner's withdrawal of sentence-suspension request held irrevocable; appeal rejected and costs awarded.
Decizia nr. 6246/2004
Withdrawal of sentence-execution challenge stands as appeal dismissed unfounded, costs imposed.
Decizia nr. 3699/2003
Convict's sentence suspension appeal dismissed as unfounded; costs awarded

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 38515 pct. 1 lit. b) C. proc. pen.

Basis for rejecting the appeal as unfounded, constituting the main ground for the verdict.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Asupra recursului de față;

În baza lucrărilor din dosar, constată următoarele:

Prin sentința penală nr. 788 din 11 iunie 2004, Tribunalul București a luat act de cererea de întrerupere a executării pedepsei formulată de condamnatul S.I.M., personal în fața instanței de judecată.

Împotriva sentinței, a declarat apel, reiterând cererea de întrerupere a executării pedepsei în condițiile art. 453 lit. a) C. proc. pen.

Prin decizia penală nr. 520 din 9 iulie 2004, Curtea de Apel București, a respins apelul ca nefondat, cu motivarea că petentul a renunțat la cerere.

Împotriva deciziei condamnatul a declarat recurs, fără a-l motiva.

Din examinarea dosarului rezultă situația de fapt expusă, în sensul că cererea de întrerupere a executării pedepsei formulată la 27 februarie 2004 de condamnat a fost retrasă, împrejurare în care instanțele, în mod corect nu au mai procedat la judecată.

Conform art. 453 alin. (2) C. proc. pen., titularul cererii este procurorul, condamnatul și persoanele arătate la art. 362 alin. ultim C. proc. pen.

Rezultă că, printre alții, titularul cererii este condamnatul, care poate reveni oricând asupra ei.

Cum în cauză procurorul nu și-a însușit cererea, instanțele, în mod temeinic și legal, au luat act de retragerea acesteia.

În baza art. 38515 pct. 1 lit. b) C. proc. pen., recursul va fi respins, ca nefondat, iar recurentul condamnat obligat la cheltuieli judiciare statului, iar onorariul apărătorului din oficiu, se va avansa din fondul Ministerului Justiției.

PENTRU ACESTE MOTIVE

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E

Respinge, ca nefondat, recursul declarat de condamnatul S.I.M. împotriva deciziei penale nr. 520 din 9 iulie 2004 a Curții de Apel București, secția a II-a penală.

Obligă pe recurentul condamnat să plătească statului suma de 800.000 lei cheltuieli judiciare, din care suma de 200.000 lei, reprezentând onorariul pentru apărarea din oficiu, se va avansa din fondul Ministerului Justiției.

Definitivă.

Pronunțată în ședință publică, azi 27 septembrie 2004.