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 topic of great importance in criminal law: the methods of notifying judicial acts to defendants residing abroad. This decision by the Court of Cassation is part of a complex regulatory framework, highlighting the necessary requirements for an defendant to be declared absent during proceedings. The Court partially overturned the decision of the Court of Assizes of Appeal of Bologna, clarifying the limits of notification by completed deposit.

Regulatory Context

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

• Notification by registered mail with notice of delivery
• Completion of deposit
• Absence of declared domicile

The Ruling's Maxim

Defendant residing abroad - Registered mail with notice of delivery pursuant to art. 169 Code of Criminal Procedure - Notification by completed deposit - Omission to elect or declare domicile within national territory - Notification of the introductory act of the trial to the appointed counsel - Sufficiency for the declaration of absence - Conditions. The notification of the introductory act of the trial to the appointed counsel, following the failure of the defendant residing abroad to collect the registered letter sent to him pursuant to art. 169, paragraph 1, Code of Criminal Procedure, the completion of such notification by completed deposit, and the lack of a declared or elected domicile within the territory of the State, does not allow for the declaration of the defendant's absence pursuant to art. 420-bis, Code of Criminal Procedure, in the absence of elements from which to infer that he had actual knowledge of the proceedings or that he voluntarily evaded them.

This maxim underscores the importance of demonstrating that the defendant had actual knowledge of the proceedings or that they voluntarily evaded them. The Court therefore ruled that mere notification to the appointed counsel is not sufficient to justify the declaration of the defendant's absence.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 16315 of 2024 represents an important clarification on the notification and absence of defendants residing abroad. The Court of Cassation reiterated that the protection of the defendant's rights 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.