Commentary on Judgment No. 44255 of 2024: Continued Offense and Determination of the Sentence

The judgment no. 44255 of October 16, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation, provides important clarifications regarding the management of continued offenses in the criminal context. The case at hand, which involves the defendant P. C., focuses on the method of determining the sentence for offenses that have already been judged and those still under judgment, raising significant questions for jurisprudence.

The Concept of Continued Offense

In Italian jurisprudence, the continued offense is defined as a set of distinct offenses, but linked by a single criminal design. The importance of this category lies in the possibility of considering the entire behavior of the offender, rather than analyzing individual offenses in isolation. The judgment in question emphasizes the principle that the judge, in assessing criminal responsibility, must identify the most serious offense among those under examination.

  • Identification of the most serious offense.
  • Determination of the base sentence.
  • Autonomous increase for satellite offenses.

The Reference Maxim

Cognition judgment - Offenses partially already judged and partially "sub iudice" - Identification of the most serious offense in that submitted to the judgment - Determination of the overall sentence - Methods - Indication. In the matter of continued offense, the judge of cognition who, having recognized the existence of a single criminal design among the offenses for which he has ascertained responsibility and those already subject to irrevocable judgment, identifies among those submitted to his judgment the most serious offense, must determine the sentence to use it as the basis for calculation, then operating autonomous increases for each of the satellite offenses, including those already judged, without being bound by the measure established for them by the irrevocable judgment.

This maxim highlights a crucial aspect: the judge is not bound by the sentence already established for the offenses that have been judged, but can independently determine the sentence for satellite offenses, taking into account the entire criminal design. This approach allows for greater flexibility in assessing criminal responsibility and sentencing, addressing the needs for justice and proportionality.

Conclusions

Judgment no. 44255 of 2024 represents a significant step in defining the penal treatment of continued offenses. It reaffirms the importance of considering the overall context of the offender's behavior, promoting a fairer and more just application of criminal norms. The distinction between offenses already judged and those still under judgment, combined with the possibility of an autonomous determination of the sentence, offers fundamental interpretative tools for judges, in order to ensure a criminal process that respects the principles of justice and proportionality.

Bianucci Law Firm