Bartolini Francesco
GIUDICE DELL'ESECUZIONE E INDAGINI DIFENSIVE: QUALE TUTELA?
(Nota a sentenza Corte suprema di Cassazione penale sezione I 21 gennaio 2021, n. 2603)
in Diritto penale e processo, 2022, fasc. 3 pag. 377 - 383
(Bibliografia: a pié di pagina o nel corpo del testo)
[Abstract tratto dalla rivista]
With the sentence in the epigraph, pronounced in relation to the Y. G. case, the Supreme Court ruled that in the execution procedure the president of the court can not declare the incompetence: this declaration belongs to the college. The choice to adopt the measure called “de plano”, which seems to recall art. 666 paragraph 2 c.p.p., assumes that the execution judge is competent and bases the rejective provision on reasons of inadmissibility specifically indicated by that rule: absence of legal conditions or the re-proposal of a request already rejected. In the case in question, however, both the required requirements are missing. Therefore, the conclusion reached by the Supreme Court is that the decision of the case rests with the judge of execution, understood as the court, who must decide on the request of the defender who intends to make withdrawals on finds that have been confiscated.[Abstract appeared in the Journal]
Sommario: L’attività investigativa del difensore. - Attività investigativa preventiva e giudizio di revisione: la competenza del giudice dell’esecuzione. - Il procedimento ("rectius", procedimenti) davanti al giudice dell’esecuzione. - Il “vulnus” del procedimento “in executivis”.
Fonti
- Codice di procedura penale art. 327-bis
- Codice di procedura penale art. 391-nonies
- Codice di procedura penale art. 666, comma 2
Versione PDF
Document delivery