Judgment No. 16822 of 2022: House Arrest and Late Request at Hearing

Judgment No. 16822 of December 20, 2022, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers significant insights regarding alternative measures to detention, particularly concerning house arrest and the procedures for requesting it at a hearing. The case at hand concerns the defendant F. P. and focuses on the validity of the request for house arrest presented in subordination to that of probation.

Legal Context

The Court highlights that, in matters of alternative measures to detention, a request for house arrest can be made during a hearing, even if it is presented in subordination to a request for probation. This approach is based on the principle that the necessary conditions for both measures are common and do not require separate assessments.

• Alternative measures to detention are governed by Law of July 26, 1975, No. 354, particularly in Article 47.
• The judgment emphasizes the importance of a positive prognosis, which must be evaluated based on the specific circumstances of the case.
• A crucial point in the case concerns the proposal to revoke probation due to violations of its conditions, which led to the request for house arrest.

Analysis of the Judgment

01 President: MOGINI STEFANO. Rapporteur: CASA FILIPPO. Rapporteur: CASA FILIPPO. Defendant: PATTARO FAUSTO. P.M. KATE TASSONE. (Conf.) Annuls with referral, TRIBUNALE DI SORVEGLIANZA VENEZIA, 25/05/2022 563000 INSTITUTES OF PREVENTION AND PENALTY (PENAL SYSTEM) - Alternative measures to detention - House arrest - Lateness of the request made at hearing in subordination to probation - Exclusion - Case. In matters of alternative measures to detention, a request for house arrest made at a hearing in subordination to a request for probation is admissible, given that, once the legal conditions are met, the prerequisite related to the formulation of a positive prognosis is common to both measures and does not involve a separate assessment (Case where the request was made at the hearing scheduled to discuss the proposal to revoke probation due to repeated violations of its conditions).

This judgment reaffirms a principle already established in previous decisions, such as No. 16442 of 2010 and No. 21274 of 2002, which confirm the possibility of a late request for house arrest. It is essential for the defendant to demonstrate that they meet the legal conditions for the admissibility of such a measure.

Conclusions

In conclusion, Judgment No. 16822 of 2022 represents an important clarification for legal professionals and defendants seeking access to alternative measures to detention. The possibility of submitting a request for house arrest in subordination to probation, even in a revocation context, is an opportunity that must be carefully considered, as it highlights the flexibility of the legal system in responding to the social reintegration needs of individuals.