Timeliness of criminal indictments and preventive arrest extensions submitted on the final day of the statutory procedural deadline
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe High Court of Cassation and Justice, in a mandatory decision issued by the panel for ruling on appeals in the interest of the law, admitted the appeal filed by the General Prosecutor and established a uniform interpretation regarding procedural deadlines in criminal cases. The dispute concerned the validity of submitting an indictment charging an accused for whom a preventive measure had been ordered, or a proposal to extend the duration of preventive arrest or house arrest, on the final day of the statutory period. The Court determined that such submissions are not considered timely when made in the last day of the deadline, which is calculated in accordance with the specific temporal rules of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This ruling provides a binding directive for all lower courts, resolving the ambiguity surrounding whether actions taken on the expiry date itself are effective or void under the relevant procedural articles governing preventive measures and trial referrals.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedart. 207 alin. (1, art. 222 alin. (4, art. 235 alin. (1, art. 474 alin. (4; Timeliness of criminal indictments and preventive arrest extensions submitted on the final day of the statutory procedural deadline: The dispute concerned the validity of submitting an indictment charging an accused for whom a preventive measure had been ordered, or a proposal to extend the duration of preventive arrest or house arrest, on the final day of the statutory period. The Court determined that such submissions are not considered timely when made in the last day of the deadline, which is calculated in accordance with the specific temporal rules of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This ruling provides a binding directive for all lower courts, resolving the ambiguity surrounding whether actions taken on the expiry date itself are effective or void under the relevant procedural articles governing preventive measures and trial referrals.
Keywords
AI generatedCited Legislation
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedKey legal questions extracted by Legislator
AI generatedCited as part of the substantive legal basis for the uniform interpretation of timeliness regarding the referral of the accused to trial.
Cited as part of the substantive legal basis for the uniform interpretation of timeliness regarding the referral of the accused to trial.
Cited as part of the substantive legal basis for the uniform interpretation of timeliness regarding the referral of the accused to trial.
Cited to establish the binding nature and obligatoriness of the court's decision.
Full text
ROMÂNIA
ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE
Completul pentru soluționarea recursului în interesul legii
Minuta deciziei nr. 3 Dosar nr. 2691/1/2024
Şedinţa din 17 februarie 2025
ÎN NUMELE LEGII
DECIDE:
Admite recursul în interesul legii formulat de procurorul general al Parchetului de pe lângă Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie.
În interpretarea şi aplicarea unitară a dispoziţiilor art. 207 alin. (1), art. 222 alin. (4) şi art. 235 alin. (1) din Codul de procedură, stabileşte că nu se consideră în termen sesizarea cu rechizitoriul prin care s-a dispus trimiterea în judecată a inculpatului faţă de care s-a dispus o măsură preventivă sau cu propunerea de prelungire a duratei măsurii arestării preventive ori a arestului la domiciliu, formulată în ultima zi a termenului, calculat potrivit art.269 alin. (1), (2) şi (4) din Codul de procedură penală.
Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 474 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură penală.
Pronunţată în sedinţă publică, astăzi, 17 februarie 2025.