Incompetence due to Connection in Judgment No. 28485 of 2024: An In-depth Analysis

The recent judgment No. 28485, filed on July 16, 2024, offers significant insights into incompetence for subject matter arising from connection, a topic of considerable importance in criminal procedural law. Decided by the Court of Appeal of Caltanissetta, the ruling clarifies some fundamental aspects regarding the admissibility of the issue in the supreme court, highlighting the need for timely objection to incompetence.

Structure of the Judgment and its Fundamental Principles

The Court declared the exception of incompetence for subject matter arising from connection inadmissible, referring to Article 15 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This article establishes that incompetence cannot be raised for the first time in the supreme court if it was not previously raised during the preliminary hearing. The judgment therefore highlights how any negligence in raising the incompetence may preclude the possibility of raising the issue in later stages of the proceedings.

Incompetence for subject matter arising from connection, pursuant to Article 15 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, if not raised ex officio or objected to prior to the conclusion of the preliminary hearing or, when the latter is absent, immediately after the first ascertainment of the parties' appearance in court, cannot be raised, nor can it be raised for the first time in the supreme court, due to the provisions of Article 21, paragraph 3, of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Practical and Jurisprudential Implications

This judgment follows a jurisprudential line already established by previous decisions, including judgments No. 12764 of 2017 and No. 13938 of 2014, which had addressed similar issues. The practical implications are of great importance for legal practitioners, as they highlight the importance of a careful and well-planned procedural strategy. Lawyers must be aware that failure to raise the issue of incompetence in the preliminary phase can compromise the possibility of raising such an issue in later stages, including the supreme court appeal.

• Incompetence can only be raised in phases prior to the preliminary hearing.
• Importance of timely raising procedural exceptions.
• References to previous judgments confirming the principle.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 28485 of 2024 serves as a useful guide for lawyers and legal professionals, emphasizing the importance of timely raising exceptions of incompetence. It confirms that, in the absence of adequate attention during the preliminary phases, there is a risk of precluding defense opportunities in later stages of the proceedings. Therefore, it is essential for legal practitioners to be constantly updated and aware of the timelines and procedures to ensure the best protection of their clients' rights.