Commentary on Judgment No. 24964 of 2023: the Prevalence of the Conviction Judgment

The recent judgment No. 24964 of May 5, 2023, by the Court of Cassation offers an important reflection on the principle of ne bis in idem and the conflict between conviction and acquittal judgments due to the statute of limitations. This decision is situated within a complex legal context, where the coexistence of multiple judgments can generate uncertainties and interpretative conflicts.

The Principle of Ne Bis in Idem

The principle of ne bis in idem, established by Article 649 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, states that a person cannot be judged twice for the same fact. However, the judgment under examination clarifies how this principle should be applied in the presence of conviction and statute of limitations judgments. In particular, the Court affirmed that when a conviction judgment has become final, it prevails over a subsequent acquittal judgment that declares the extinction of the crime due to the statute of limitations.

  • Conviction Judgment: it is final and precludes the application of the extinguishing cause.
  • Acquittal Judgment due to Statute of Limitations: issued after the finality of the conviction, it cannot have effects on the res judicata.

The Reasons for the Prevalence of the Conviction Judgment

The Court justified its decision by invoking the principle of the consummation of the power to exercise criminal action. Essentially, once a conviction judgment is issued, the authority's power to prosecute the crime is exhausted. This implies that the subsequent declaration of statute of limitations, while being an extinguishing cause of the crime, cannot affect an already formed res judicata.

NE BIS IN IDEM - Proceeding defined by a conviction judgment - Subsequent judgment declaring the extinction of the same crime due to statute of limitations - Prevalence of the conviction judgment - Reasons. In terms of execution, the conflict of judgments determined by the coexistence, regarding the same subject and for the same fact, of a conviction judgment and an acquittal judgment that declared the statute of limitations of the crime occurring after the finality of the first decision, must be resolved with the prevalence of the conviction judgment, whose finality precludes the formation of the extinguishing cause due to the principle of consummation of the power to exercise criminal action.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 24964 of 2023 represents an important clarification regarding conflicts of judgments in criminal law. It reaffirms the centrality of the conviction judgment and establishes clear rules for managing situations where different judicial decisions overlap. Legal practitioners and professionals in the field must consider these principles for a correct interpretation and application of the rules, ensuring legal certainty and the protection of defendants' rights.

Bianucci Law Firm