Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_178585 AI generated

Criminal appeal scope: request for preliminary ruling on reformatio in peius declared inadmissible

Case Number ICCJ_178585
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice dismissed as inadmissible the request for a prior ruling filed by the Court of Appeal Bacau. The referral concerned a procedural conflict regarding whether an appellate court, seized solely with appeals for illegality where some grounds favor and others disfavor the defendant, could examine the merits of the sentence to potentially increase the penalty or remove suspension conditions, without violating the principle against *reformatio in peius*. The reference to the applicable legal basis was Article 418 paragraph (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which governs the limits of review and the protection of the defendant from adverse modifications in appeal proceedings.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală; Criminal appeal scope: request for preliminary ruling on reformatio in peius declared inadmissible: The referral concerned a procedural conflict regarding whether an appellate court, seized solely with appeals for illegality where some grounds favor and others disfavor the defendant, could examine the merits of the sentence to potentially increase the penalty or remove suspension conditions, without violating the principle against *reformatio in peius*. The reference to the applicable legal basis was Article 418 paragraph (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which governs the limits of review and the protection of the defendant from adverse modifications in appeal proceedings.

Keywords

AI generated
reformatio in peius preliminary ruling procedure scope of review in cassation criminal penalty preliminary proceedings principle of legality

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală
Cited in the dispositive to establish that the decision is mandatory from the date of publication in the Official Monitor of Romania.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 37/A/2016
Inadmissibility of appeal against decision rejecting revision request due to prior constitutional unconstitutionality ruling
Decizia nr. 191/2018
Inadmissibility of appeal against final decision rejecting revision petition lacking procedural interest in challenge to favorable execution ruling
Decizia nr. 162/A/2018
Appeal against revision rejection in final criminal case inadmissible; appellate ruling and underlying decisions upheld.
Decizia nr. 987/2017
Criminal revision appeal against final procedural decision declared inadmissible
Decizia nr. 233/A/2021
Inadmissibility of appeal against final judgment dismissing criminal revision petition for failure to specify statutory grounds and challenge to preliminary chamber decisions

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 477 alin. (3) din Codul de procedură penală

Cited in the dispositive to establish that the decision is mandatory from the date of publication in the Official Monitor of Romania.

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

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. 67 Dosar nr.1795/1/2021

Şedinţa din data de 29 septembrie 2021

ÎN NUMELE LEGII

D E C I D E:

Respinge, ca inadmisibilă, sesizarea formulată de Curtea de Apel Bacău, Secţia Penală şi pentru Cauze cu Minori şi Familie, în dosarul nr. 473/321/2020, prin care se solicită pronunţarea unei hotărâri prealabile pentru dezlegarea următoarei chestiuni de drept:

„Instanţa de apel investită cu apelul declarat de procuror exclusiv pentru motive de nelegalitate a sentinţei pronunţate în prima instanţă, dintre care unul/unele sunt în favoarea inculpatului, altul/altele sunt în defavoarea aceluiaşi inculpat, aceste din urma motive vizând alte chestiuni decât pedeapsa aplicată de prima instanţă, poate să examineze în privinţa acestui inculpat sentinţa apelata şi sub aspectul temeiniciei pedepsei aplicate, ce ar avea drept consecinţă majorarea cuantumului acesteia sau înlăturarea dispoziţiilor privind suspendarea sub supraveghere a executării acestei pedepse dispuse prin sentinţa apelata, fără a încălca prevederile art. 418 alin. (2) din Codul de procedură penală”.

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, 29 septembrie 2021