Post by account_disabled on Jan 2, 2024 0:28:31 GMT -5
Athe provisions of art. of the Criminal Code regarding the calculation of the duration of the preventive custodial measure. COURT considering the documents and works of the file notes the following . By Criminal Decision no. A of June issued in File no. number in old format admitting the appeal against Criminal Decision no. of May issued in File no. . of the Teleorman Tribunal the Bucharest Court of Appeal the II Criminal Section referred the Constitutional Court with the exception of the unconstitutionality of the provisions of art. para. and of art. of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The exception was raised by Ion Marmuric Lupu and Florin Piersic Country Email List Lupu during the settlement of the appeal against a conclusion by which the request to revoke the measure of preventive arrest of the minor defendants was rejected. . In justifying the exception of unconstitutionality its authors argue in essence that the criticized provisions of the law violate the constitutional provisions regarding equality of rights the legality of the punishment and the criminal character of the custodial sanction as they allow the preventive arrest of a minor under the conditions in which according to art. of the Criminal Code only an educational measure can be taken against him the execution of.
Which takes place after the decision hasis not deducted. . Bucharest Court of Appeal Second Criminal Section considers that the exception of unconstitutionality is unfounded. It shows that art. of the Code of Criminal Procedure establishes the general framework of prosecution trial and enforcement of decisions regarding juvenile offenders and art. para. from the same normative act expressly provides for the possibility of the detention and preventive arrest of a minor defendant only in a completely exceptional way without the criticized provisions of the law violating the constitutional norms contained in art.
The exception was raised by Ion Marmuric Lupu and Florin Piersic Country Email List Lupu during the settlement of the appeal against a conclusion by which the request to revoke the measure of preventive arrest of the minor defendants was rejected. . In justifying the exception of unconstitutionality its authors argue in essence that the criticized provisions of the law violate the constitutional provisions regarding equality of rights the legality of the punishment and the criminal character of the custodial sanction as they allow the preventive arrest of a minor under the conditions in which according to art. of the Criminal Code only an educational measure can be taken against him the execution of.
Which takes place after the decision hasis not deducted. . Bucharest Court of Appeal Second Criminal Section considers that the exception of unconstitutionality is unfounded. It shows that art. of the Code of Criminal Procedure establishes the general framework of prosecution trial and enforcement of decisions regarding juvenile offenders and art. para. from the same normative act expressly provides for the possibility of the detention and preventive arrest of a minor defendant only in a completely exceptional way without the criticized provisions of the law violating the constitutional norms contained in art.