Analysis of Judgment No. 18757 of 2022: Aggregation of Convictions and Early Release

Judgment No. 18757 of 2022, issued by the Court of Cassation, offers an important clarification regarding the execution of concurrent sentences and the management of early release. This topic is of extreme relevance for those operating in the criminal law sector, as it addresses complex issues related to the aggregation of convictions and the methods for deducting periods of release.

The Regulatory Context

The central issue of the judgment concerns the application of Article 78 of the Criminal Code, which governs the aggregation of sentences. According to the Court, in the case of multiple early release periods relating to convictions for offenses committed at different times, it is necessary to proceed with the formation of partial aggregations. This implies a separate calculation for each release period, taking into account the deductions that must be made. This approach aims to ensure a fair and proportionate assessment of the imposed penalties.

The Ruling's Maxim

Multiple convictions and early release periods enjoyed at different times - Aggregation - Formation methods. In the context of the execution of concurrent sentences, where multiple early release periods relate to convictions for offenses committed at different times – prior to or subsequent to detention or early release – partial aggregations must be formed with separate calculations, for each of them, of the deductions that, for various reasons, must be made, taking into account, first for the partial aggregations and then for the total one, the moderating criterion referred to in Article 78 of the Criminal Code, which must be applied not in a unitary manner and at the end, but to the penalties imposed for offenses committed before the start of detention.

This maxim highlights the importance of an application that is not only rigorous but also articulated. It is crucial for legal professionals to consider individual release periods and the impact of each on the overall sentence.

Practical Implications

• Necessity of a detailed assessment of each case to avoid injustices in the determination of penalties.
• Importance of consulting previous case law, such as judgments No. 17148 of 2010 and No. 46602 of 2019, which provide useful references for understanding the subject.
• Request for a flexible approach by judicial authorities, taking into account the specificities of each situation.

Conclusions

Judgment No. 18757 of 2022 represents a step forward in clarifying the complexities of aggregating convictions and early release. It establishes an important precedent for jurisprudence, emphasizing the need for a careful and differentiated application of the rules. Legal professionals must pay particular attention to these guidelines, which can significantly influence procedural decisions and defense strategies.