Analysis of Judgment No. 16315 of 2024: Notification and Absence of Defendants Residing Abroad

The recent judgment no. 16315 of January 10, 2024, filed on April 18, 2024, emphasizes a highly relevant issue in criminal law: the methods of notifying judicial acts to defendants residing abroad. This decision of the Court of Cassation fits into a complex regulatory context, highlighting the necessary requirements for declaring the absence of the defendant during the trial. The Court partially annulled the decision of the Court of Assizes of Appeal of Bologna, clarifying the limits of notification by complete deposit.

The Regulatory Context

According to Article 169 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, notification of acts can occur via registered mail. However, in this specific case, the defendant M. B. did not collect the registered mail sent to him. The Court established that, in the absence of a declared or elected domicile within the national territory, the notification cannot be considered sufficient to declare the absence of the defendant pursuant to Article 420-bis of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

  • Notification via informative registered mail
  • Completion of deposit
  • Absence of a declared domicile

The Principle of the Judgment

Defendant residing abroad - Informative registered mail ex Article 169 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - Notification by complete deposit - Omission of election or declaration of domicile within the national territory - Notification of the introductory act of the judgment at the office defender - Sufficiency for the declaration of absence - Conditions. The notification of the introductory act of the judgment at the office defender, following the failure to collect by the defendant residing abroad the registered mail sent to him pursuant to Article 169, paragraph 1, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the completion of such notification by complete deposit, and the lack of a declared or elected domicile in the territory of the State, does not allow for the declaration of the absence of the defendant pursuant to Article 420-bis of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in the absence of elements from which it can be inferred that he had actual knowledge of the trial or voluntarily evaded it.

This principle underscores the importance of demonstrating that the defendant had actual knowledge of the trial or voluntarily evaded it. The Court, therefore, established that mere notification at the office defender is not sufficient to justify the declaration of absence of the defendant.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment no. 16315 of 2024 represents an important clarification regarding the notification and absence of defendants residing abroad. The Court of Cassation reiterated that the protection of the rights of the defendant must be guaranteed even in a context of transnational jurisdiction. This decision not only reinforces the principles of justice but also highlights the need for an adequate notification process, to ensure a fair trial for all defendants, regardless of their residence.

Bianucci Law Firm