Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_229602 AI generated

Duration calculation for house arrest following conversion of preventive detention under the 30-day statutory limit

Case Number ICCJ_229602
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The High Court of Cassation and Justice admitted the appeal in the interest of law filed by the Prosecutor General, establishing a binding interpretive rule that mandates the application of the 30-day preventive detention limit to house arrest. The dispute concerned the procedural interpretation of criminal detention measures, specifically whether the duration of house arrest, ordered upon the admission of a challenge to preventive detention, is calculated anew or extends the remaining time from the initial preventive detention period. Citing Articles 222(1), 227(2), and 204(12) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court ruled that when a panel of judges of rights and freedoms at the judicial control court admits a challenge and converts preventive detention to house arrest, it may order house arrest only for the residual time remaining until the 30-day substantive limit calculated from the initial detention order expires, thereby clarifying that the new measure does not restart the statutory time limit.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 474 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură penală; Duration calculation for house arrest following conversion of preventive detention under the 30-day statutory limit: The dispute concerned the procedural interpretation of criminal detention measures, specifically whether the duration of house arrest, ordered upon the admission of a challenge to preventive detention, is calculated anew or extends the remaining time from the initial preventive detention period. Citing Articles 222(1), 227(2), and 204(12) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court ruled that when a panel of judges of rights and freedoms at the judicial control court admits a challenge and converts preventive detention to house arrest, it may order house arrest only for the residual time remaining until the 30-day substantive limit calculated from the initial detention order expires, thereby clarifying that the new measure does not restart the statutory time limit.

Keywords

AI generated
calculation of time limit preventive detention code of criminal procedure statutory limits right to remain judicial law

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 474 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură penală
Procedural rule cited to establish that the court's decision is mandatory and binding.
AI generated
ICCJ_230677
Duration of house arrest substituting preventive detention: requirement to deduct time already served from the 30-day constitutional limit
Decizia nr. 3441/2010
Excessive duration of preventive detention justifying substitution with house arrest in minor trafficking case
ICCJ_84648
Preventive detention revocation after 180-day statutory limit exceeded during procedural return
Decizia nr. 6739/2012
Preventive detention replaced with house arrest; prosecution appeal dismissed
Decizia nr. 3377/2003
Application of preventive detention time limits to first-instance trial versus investigative phase

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
art. 222 alin. (1) cu referire la art. 227 alin. (2) şi art. 204 alin.(12) teza I din Codul de procedură penală

Substantive legal basis cited in the ruling to establish the interpretation of the time limit for house arrest following the admission of a challenge to preventive detention.

art. 474 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură penală

Procedural rule cited to establish that the court's decision is mandatory and binding.

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

ROMÂNIA

ÎNALTA CURTE DE CASAŢIE ŞI JUSTIŢIE

Completul pentru soluționarea recursului în interesul legii

Minuta deciziei nr. 17 Dosar nr. 1458/1/2025

Şedinţa din 29 septembrie 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 dispoziţiilor art. 222 alin. (1) cu referire la art. 227 alin. (2) şi art. 204 alin.(12) teza I din Codul de procedură penală, stabileşte următoarele:

În cazul admiterii contestaţiei, Completul de judecători de drepturi şi libertăţi de la instanţa de control judiciar va putea dispune luarea măsurii arestului la domiciliu pentru durata de timp rămasă până la împlinirea termenului substanţial de 30 de zile calculat de la momentul arestării preventive a inculpatului, în temeiul dispoziţiei judecătorului de drepturi şi libertăţi de la prima instanţă.

Obligatorie, potrivit dispoziţiilor art. 474 alin. (4) din Codul de procedură penală.

Pronunţată în sedinţă publică, astăzi, 29 septembrie 2025.