Commentary on Judgment No. 24874 of 2023: Bankruptcy Accessory Penalties and Appeal to the Supreme Court

The judgment of the Supreme Court No. 24874 of April 21, 2023, offers important insights regarding the bankruptcy accessory penalties applied in plea bargaining. In particular, the Court addressed the issue of the appealability to the Supreme Court in case of motivational defects, highlighting the crucial role of the agreement between the parties. This article aims to analyze the implications of this ruling, providing a clear and understandable overview of the issue.

The Context of the Judgment

In the case examined, the defendant S. B. faced the issue of the accessory penalties provided for by Article 216, last paragraph, of the Bankruptcy Law, in the context of plea bargaining. The Court established that, if such penalties were not subject to agreement between the parties, the appeal to the Supreme Court is admissible for defects in motivation. This aspect is fundamental, as it emphasizes the need for a clear definition of the conditions agreed upon during the plea bargaining.

Bankruptcy accessory penalties - Defect of motivation - Appeal to the Supreme Court - Admissibility - Condition - Exclusion of the measure from the agreement. The plea bargaining judgment that applied the accessory penalties provided for by Article 216, last paragraph, of the bankruptcy law is subject to appeal to the Supreme Court for defect of motivation pursuant to the general provisions of Article 606, paragraph 1, letter e), of the code of criminal procedure, in cases where the accessory penalty was not part of the agreement between the parties, otherwise it can only be appealed within the limits of Article 448, paragraph 2-bis, of the code of criminal procedure.

Practical Implications of the Judgment

This ruling has several practical implications for lawyers and their clients. In particular, the following points are highlighted:

  • Clarity in the plea bargaining agreement: It is essential that the accessory penalties are clearly defined and accepted by both parties.
  • Possibility of appeal: If the accessory penalties were not discussed, the door opens for a possible appeal to the Supreme Court.
  • Defects of motivation: The Court expressed itself on defects of motivation, an aspect that can significantly influence the outcome of the appeal.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 24874 of 2023 represents an important step in the jurisprudence regarding plea bargaining and bankruptcy accessory penalties. It clarifies that, in the absence of a clear agreement, the accessory measures can be contested through an appeal to the Supreme Court. This development draws the attention of legal practitioners to the importance of proper management of agreements during plea bargaining, to avoid future disputes and ensure greater legal certainty for all parties involved.

Bianucci Law Firm