Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Ordinanza — n. 12129/2026 — snpen AI generated

Italian Supreme Court dismisses appeal as inadmissible due to repetitive and generic grounds already addressed in second instance.

Case Number Ordinanza — n. 12129/2026 — snpen
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Italy (IT)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Italian Supreme Court declared the appeal inadmissible, ordering the appellant to pay procedural costs and a fine. The court found the appeal's arguments were merely repetitive of those already rejected by the Court of Appeal and lacked specific legal substance. Consequently, the lower court's decision regarding the penalty quantification and other issues stood unchallenged.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 364 c.p.p.; Art. 365 c.p.p.: Appeals that merely reiterate grounds already examined and decided upon in the second instance, or that are excessively generic without new specific arguments, must be declared inadmissible.

Keywords

AI generated
inadmissible appeal repetitive grounds generic arguments second instance review procedural dismissal

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 364 c.p.p.
Art. 365 c.p.p.
AI generated
Ordinanza — n. 17692/2026 — snpen
Cassation court dismisses appeal as inadmissible due to repetitive grounds already rejected by lower courts.
Ordinanza — n. 30741/2024 — snpen
Cassation court dismisses appeals for lack of specificity and merit review in criminal proceedings.
Ordinanza — n. 51752/2023 — snpen
Cassation appeal dismissed for lack of specific grounds and mere repetition of lower court arguments.
Ordinanza — n. 43585/2024 — snpen
Italian Court dismisses appeal for lack of specific grounds regarding criminal liability and sentencing recidivism.
Ordinanza — n. 1335/2024 — snpen
Cassation appeal dismissed as groundless repetition of already examined arguments without critical analysis.

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

ORDINANZA sul ricorso proposto da: MANCINELLI ALESSANDRO nato a CHIETI il 29/04/1989 avverso la sentenza del 04/04/2025 della CORTE APPELLO di L'AQUILA dato avviso alle parti; udita la relazione svolta dal Consigliere GIUSEPPE COSCIONI;RITENUTO IN FATTO E

CONSIDERATO IN DIRITTO

Letto il ricorso di Mancinelli Alessandro; rilevato che i motivi di ricorso sono inammissibili in quanto meramente reiterativi di quanto già eccepito in appello e su cui la Corte di appello ha congruamente motivato: si vedano, in particolare, pag.4 sui primi tre motivi di ricorso e pag. 5 sulla quantificazione della pena; considerato inoltre che i motivi 1 e 3 sono inammissibili anche alla luce della loro estrema genericità; rilevato, pertanto, che il ricorso deve essere dichiarato inammissibile, con la condanna del(,a ricorrente al pagamento delle spese processuali e della somma di euro tremila in favore della Cassa delle ammende. P.Q. P.Q.MIl Consigliere