Evidential Seizure: Commentary on Judgment No. 46549 of 2024

The recent judgment No. 46549 of October 3, 2024, issued by the Court of Cassation and filed on December 18, 2024, offers significant food for thought regarding the legitimacy of evidential seizure. In particular, the principle established clarifies that it is not necessary for the owner of the asset to coincide with the suspect or the perpetrator of the crime to justify a seizure.

The Principle of Evidential Seizure

Evidential seizure is a fundamental tool in criminal proceedings, used to ensure the preservation of evidence deemed relevant for the ascertainment of facts. The judgment in question, in fact, focuses on the necessary relationship between the seized asset and the crime, rather than on the coincidence between the owner and the suspect.

Evidential seizure - Coincidence between the owner of the asset and the suspect perpetrator of the act - Necessity - Exclusion. For the legitimacy of evidential seizure, it is not necessary for the owner of the asset subject to the restriction to coincide with the suspect or the perpetrator of the act for which proceedings are being brought, the relationship between the thing and the crime being sufficient.

This maxim, which synthesizes the established legal principle, implies that seizure can be legitimate even when the evidence does not directly belong to the suspect. This aspect is crucial, as it broadens the possibilities for investigation and safeguarding the evidence necessary for the ascertainment of truth in criminal proceedings.

Regulatory and Jurisprudential References

The main regulatory reference for evidential seizure is found in Article 253 of the New Code of Criminal Procedure. This article outlines the methods and conditions for carrying out a seizure, reiterating the importance of the connection between the asset and the crime. It is interesting to note how previous case law has already dealt with similar cases, as demonstrated by consistent maxims, including:

• No. 21960 of 2017 Rv. 270508-01
• No. 10833 of 2021 Rv. 281290-01
• No. 37145 of 2022 Rv. 283598-01
• No. 24065 of 2024 Rv. 286552-01

These judgments contribute to outlining a coherent and harmonious legal framework regarding the issue of evidential seizure, highlighting how case law is constantly evolving to meet the needs of justice.

Conclusions

In conclusion, judgment No. 46549 of 2024 represents an important step in the evolution of Italian criminal law, clarifying a crucial aspect of evidential seizure. The possibility of proceeding with seizure even in the absence of a coincidence between the owner of the asset and the suspect opens new perspectives for the protection of evidence and the effectiveness of investigations. It is therefore essential that legal professionals and citizens understand the scope of this judgment and its implications in the context of criminal investigations.