Conditional Suspension of Sentence: Analysis of Judgment No. 29643 of 2024

The recent judgment No. 29643 of May 3, 2024, by the Court of Cassation, which was heard on July 19, 2024, touches on a crucial aspect of Italian criminal law: the granting of the conditional suspension of the sentence. In particular, the Court established that in calculating the overall sentence for the purpose of the second granting of the benefit, the monetary penalty imposed and declared suspended in the first conviction should not be taken into account. This clarification proves fundamental for understanding the dynamics related to the granting of the conditional suspension and its implications for the defendants.

The Legal Context

The conditional suspension of the sentence is an institution provided for by Article 163 of the Italian Penal Code, which states that the custodial sentence must not exceed two years to benefit from the suspension. However, the central issue addressed by the judgment under analysis concerns the computation of the overall sentence, particularly when it comes to a second granting of the benefit.

  • The first aspect to consider is the distinction between custodial sentences and monetary penalties.
  • Secondly, it is important to note how the Court aligns with previous jurisprudential maxims, specifying that the suspended monetary penalty should not be counted in the computation.
  • Finally, the judgment emphasizes the need to ensure a fair and just approach towards defendants who have already served a sentence.
Granting for the second time - Calculation of the overall sentence - Monetary penalty whose equivalence results in exceeding the threshold of two years of custodial sentence - Relevance - Exclusion. In the matter of conditional suspension of the sentence, for the purpose of the second granting of the benefit, the monetary penalty imposed and declared suspended in the first conviction, equated to the custodial sentence, should not be taken into account in the computation of the overall sentence relevant under Article 163, paragraph one, last part, penal code.

This maxim clarifies unequivocally that, for the purpose of computing the overall sentence, the monetary penalty should not influence the assessment of the two-year threshold, thus allowing for a greater possibility of access to the conditional suspension of the sentence for defendants.

Practical Implications of the Judgment

The consequences of this judgment are significant. Firstly, it provides greater protection to defendants who, having already served a sentence, can aspire to a second granting of the conditional suspension of the sentence without the fear of their path being influenced by previous monetary convictions. Moreover, it opens a debate on the rationale behind this choice, which aims to guarantee a second chance to those who have already shown a willingness to reintegrate into society.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 29643 of 2024 represents an important step towards a fairer application of the law regarding the conditional suspension of the sentence. It clarifies not only the fundamental distinction between custodial sentences and monetary penalties but also the importance of providing convicted individuals with the opportunity for a second chance. Lawyers and legal professionals should take this orientation into account in their daily practice to provide adequate and informed advice to their clients.

Bianucci Law Firm