Court dismisses confiscation claim due to insufficient evidence proving prior harvests generated illegal profit.

The appellate court overturned the lower court's decision to confiscate €22,717.82 from a defendant convicted of growing cannabis. The prosecution argued that evidence of lime scale, dust, and electricity usage indicated prior harvests, but the court found these indicators inconclusive without proof of an earlier crop. Consequently, the court ruled that the defendant could not be deemed to have received illegal profit from a non-existent prior harvest.