Commentary on Judgment No. 18797 of 2023: Nullity and Interrogation of the Suspect

Judgment No. 18797 of January 27, 2023, filed on May 4, 2023, represents an important reference point for understanding the procedural dynamics related to the suspect's interrogation and the exercise of criminal action. In particular, the Supreme Court of Cassation's ruling focuses on the issue of the nullity of the summons for trial, in relation to the failure to conduct the interrogation after the first notice of conclusion of investigations.

Context of the Judgment

In the case examined, the suspect had requested to be interrogated after the first notice of conclusion of preliminary investigations, but this interrogation had not been carried out. However, subsequently, a new notice of conclusion was served concerning all the crimes for which proceedings were underway. The Court held that the suspect's failure to request an interrogation after the second notice did not result in the nullity of the summons for trial.

Notice of conclusion of investigations – Request for interrogation by the suspect – Failure to conduct – Consolidation of proceedings – New notice of conclusion relating to all crimes being prosecuted – Failure to request to be subjected to interrogation after receiving the new notice – Exercise of criminal action – Nullity – Exclusion – Reasons. The failure to conduct the interrogation of the suspect who requested it after receiving a first notice of conclusion of preliminary investigations does not give rise to nullity of the summons for trial if, following the consolidation with another proceeding, a new notice of conclusion of investigations relating to all crimes being prosecuted was served, and the suspect, subsequently thereto, did not renew the request to be subjected to interrogation, with the consequent lawful exercise of criminal action by the public prosecutor. (In its reasoning, the Court specified that the adoption and service of the second notice of conclusion produce independent procedural effects, including the commencement of a new term within which the suspect may exercise their defense rights).

Implications of the Judgment

The implications of this judgment are relevant for understanding criminal procedures. Firstly, it highlights the need for the suspect to renew the request for interrogation in the event of a new notice of conclusion of investigations. The Court, in fact, clarified that the service of a second notice entails the commencement of a new period for exercising defense rights, rendering the previously made request superfluous.

• Clarity on the validity of criminal proceedings even in the absence of an interrogation.
• Importance of always being updated on notices of conclusion of investigations.
• Need for a well-planned defense strategy based on procedural deadlines.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 18797 of 2023 provides an important interpretation regarding the role of the suspect's interrogation and the consequences of serving a new notice of conclusion of investigations. The Supreme Court of Cassation reiterates that, in the absence of a new request for interrogation, the public prosecutor may lawfully exercise criminal action. This principle is fundamental to ensuring the fluidity of the process and the protection of the rights of the parties involved.