Substitute Penalties and the Cartabia Reform: The Court of Cassation Clarifies the Terms for Requesting Them on Appeal (Judgment No. 25199/2025)

The Cartabia Reform (Legislative Decree No. 150/2022) has introduced a significant evolution in the Italian criminal justice system, expanding substitute penalties for short custodial sentences. This instrument, aimed at promoting rehabilitation and decongesting prisons, has raised questions about its practical application, particularly regarding the timing and methods of requesting it on appeal. The Court of Cassation, with judgment No. 25199 of 2025, provides essential clarification, outlining the defendant's responsibilities and the time limits for accessing these benefits.

Substitute Penalties in the Cartabia Reform: A Brief Overview

Under the Cartabia Reform, custodial sentences of up to four years can be replaced by alternative sanctions such as community service, house arrest, or supervised freedom (Art. 20-bis of the Criminal Code et seq.). The objective is to offer a concrete alternative to detention, promoting more effective social reintegration pathways. Access to these benefits, however, is not automatic and requires precise procedures, especially in the later stages of legal proceedings.

Judgment No. 25199/2025: The Defendant's Burden to Request on Appeal

The Court of Cassation, with judgment No. 25199 of 2025, examined the case of the defendant G. P. M. De M., clarifying a crucial aspect for the application of substitute penalties in appeal proceedings, even when the appeal has been filed by the Public Prosecutor. The Court rejected the appeal, affirming a fundamental principle, expressed in the following maxim:

In matters of substitute penalties for short custodial sentences, for the appellate judge to be required to rule on their applicability as provided by the transitional provisions contained in Art. 95 of Legislative Decree of October 10, 2022, No. 150 (so-called Cartabia reform), a request to this effect by the defendant is necessary, even in the case of an appeal filed by the public prosecutor against an acquittal. This request does not necessarily have to be made with the notice of appeal or with the submission of new grounds pursuant to Art. 585, paragraph 4, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but must be made, at the latest, during the hearing for the discussion of the appeal.

This ruling is of extreme importance. The Court of Cassation establishes that the application of substitute penalties on appeal cannot be done ex officio but requires an explicit request from the defendant. This obligation persists even if the appeal has been filed by the Public Prosecutor. Crucial is the deadline: the request is not tied to the notice of appeal or new grounds but can be made up to the hearing for the discussion of the appeal. It serves as a warning to the defense to be proactive and timely, utilizing the granted timeframe to access an alternative to detention.

Practical Implications for the Defense

The Court of Cassation's decision requires careful consideration:

• Initiative: The defendant must always request substitute penalties.
• Timing: The request can be made up to the appeal hearing.
• Strategy: Evaluation and request must be an integral part of the defense strategy.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 25199 of 2025 by the Court of Cassation consolidates the application of the Cartabia Reform. It highlights the need for conscious and timely action by the defendant and their lawyer to seize the opportunities offered by the legislator for a more socially reintegrative form of penalty execution.