Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
ICCJ_84650 AI generated

Robbery sentence merger on revocation of suspension: appeal admitted, prior and new terms merged into single 7-year sentence.

Case Number ICCJ_84650
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Romania (RO)
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court admitted the defendant's appeal, overturned the lower court's judgments, and merged the prior suspended 2-year sentence with the current 7-year aggregate sentence into a single 7-year sentence under the concurrent-offense rules (arts. 33 lit. a and 34 lit. b of the Criminal Code), with that merged sentence remaining in force. The dispute arose from a robbery conviction where the trial and appellate courts, after annulling the conditional suspension of the earlier sentence under arts. 85(1) and 865(1), had failed to apply the rules on concurrent offenses as required when suspension is revoked. The decisive legal basis is that annulment of a suspended sentence under those provisions triggers contopirea (merger) of the prior and new sentences under art. 34 and 35 or, as applicable, art. 39(1)–(3), rather than simple consecutive cumulation.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

art. 865 alin. (1) C. pen, art. 85 alin. (1) C. pen, Art. 33 lit. a) C. pen, Art. 34 lit. b) C. pen; Robbery sentence merger on revocation of suspension: appeal admitted, prior and new terms merged into single 7-year sentence: 33 lit. a and 34 lit. b of the Criminal Code), with that merged sentence remaining in force. The dispute arose from a robbery conviction where the trial and appellate courts, after annulling the conditional suspension of the earlier sentence under arts. 85(1) and 865(1), had failed to apply the rules on concurrent offenses as required when suspension is revoked. The decisive legal basis is that annulment of a suspended sentence under those provisions triggers contopirea (merger) of the prior and new sentences under art. 34 and 35 or, as applicable, art. 39(1)–(3), rather than simple consecutive cumulation.

Keywords

AI generated
sentencing for robbery revocation of suspended sentence concurrence of criminal offenses criminal revision aggregate sentence the term 'judgment'

Cited Legislation

AI generated
art. 865 alin. (1) C. pen
85 alin.(1) și art. 865 alin. (1) C. pen., se aplică dispoziţiile privitoare la concursul de infracţiuni sau la recidivă, prin contopirea pedepsei anterioare cu noua pedeapsă potrivit art.
art. 85 alin. (1) C. pen
În temeiul art. 85 alin. (1) C. pen., s-a anulat suspendarea condiţionată a executării pedepsei de 2 ani închisoare dispusă prin sentinţa penală nr.
Art. 33 lit. a) C. pen
Main ground for the verdict: the court applied the rules on concurrent offences to merge the previous sentence with the new one.
Art. 34 lit. b) C. pen
Main ground for the verdict: used to determine the resulting sentence after the merger of the concurrent punishments.
AI generated
Decizia nr. 1365/2006
Revocation of conditional suspension for new offense committed during trial period and merger of concurrent criminal sentences
Decizia nr. 13/2003
Merger of suspended sentence with prior concurrent conviction and recidivism under Arts. 85 and 37 Penal Code
Decizia nr. 836/2018
Multiple sentences merged into single 4-year 2-month term on reconvicted fraudster's penalty-concatenation challenge; prior revocation annulled.
Decizia nr. 262/2003
Sentence merger recalculated to 5 years after appellate sentence reduction; prior 7-year-6-month term vacated.
Decizia nr. 126/2020
Concurrent offenses merged; aggregate 9-year sentence upheld on appeal after consolidation.

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 33 lit. a) C. pen.

Main ground for the verdict: the court applied the rules on concurrent offences to merge the previous sentence with the new one.

Art. 34 lit. b) C. pen.

Main ground for the verdict: used to determine the resulting sentence after the merger of the concurrent punishments.

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

Suspendarea executării pedepsei. Anulare. Contopirea pedepselor

În cazul în care se dispune anularea suspendării executării pedepsei conform art. 85 alin.(1) și art. 865 alin. (1) C. pen., se aplică dispoziţiile privitoare la concursul de infracţiuni sau la recidivă, prin contopirea pedepsei anterioare cu noua pedeapsă potrivit art. 34 și 35 sau, după caz, potrivit art. 39 alin. (1) – (3) C. pen.

Secţia penală, decizia nr. 5037 din 6 noiembrie 2003

Prin sentinţa nr. 306 din 27 martie 2003, Tribunalul București, secţia a II-a penală, a condamnat pe inculpatul D.A. la pedeapsa rezultantă de 7 ani închisoare pentru săvârșirea real, în concurs real, a mai multor infracţiuni de tâlhărie.

În temeiul art. 85 alin. (1) C. pen., s-a anulat suspendarea condiţionată a executării pedepsei de 2 ani închisoare dispusă prin sentinţa penală nr. 1607 din 28 septembrie 2001 a Judecătoriei Sectorului 3 București.

Prin decizia nr. 311 din 28 mai 2003, Curtea de Apel București, secţia a II-a penală, a respins apelul inculpatului.

Recursul declarat de inculpat este fondat.

Verificând actele dosarului se constată că instanţele au greșit atunci când, după anularea suspendării condiţionate a executării pedepsei anterioare, nu au făcut aplicarea dispoziţiilor privitoare la concursul de infracţiuni.

În consecinţă recursul inculpatului a fost admis, s-au casat hotărârile atacate și s-a dispus contopirea pedepsei anterioare de 2 ani închisoare cu pedeapsa rezultantă de 7 ani închisoare stabilită în cauza de faţă, conform prevederilor art. 33 lit. a) și 34 lit. b) C. pen.