Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Ordinanza — n. 1206/2026 — snpen AI generated

Criminal appeal dismissed for inadmissibility as the imposed sentence was deemed proportionate by the court.

Case Number Ordinanza — n. 1206/2026 — snpen
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Italy (IT)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Court of Cassazione declared the appeal filed by D'Avino Alushi Amadeo inadmissible regarding the criminal conviction. The appellant argued against the sanction, but the court found the penalty imposed under Articles 337, 582, and 612 of the Penal Code to be fully proportionate. Consequently, the appeal was rejected, and the appellant was ordered to pay procedural costs and a fine to the Cassa delle ammende.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 337, 582, 612 cod. pen.; The appeal challenging the proportionality of a criminal sentence is inadmissible if the first instance court has fully and clearly explained the reasons for deeming the penalty congruous with the offense.

Keywords

AI generated
criminal appeal inadmissibility proportionality of sentence Cassa delle ammende procedural costs conviction proportionality

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 337 cod. pen.
Art. 582 cod. pen.
Art. 612 cod. pen.
AI generated
Ordinanza — n. 11784/2022 — snpen
Italian Court dismisses appeal on sentencing grounds as facts are manifestly unfounded and penalty was favorable.
Ordinanza — n. 8753/2022 — snpen
Cassation court dismisses appeal for genericity regarding sentencing and generic mitigating circumstances.
Ordinanza — n. 32958/2025 — snpen
Cassation appeal dismissed as inadmissible for being generic and merely reproducing lower court censure.
Ordinanza — n. 15066/2024 — snpen
Cassation court dismisses appeal as inadmissible due to generic grounds and lack of specific legal arguments.
Ordinanza — n. 23053/2025 — snpen
Cassation appeal dismissed as inadmissible for being generic and merely reproducing lower court censure.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

a seguente ORDINANZA sul ricorso proposto da: D'AVINO ALUSHI AMADEO nato il 09/01/1990 avverso la sentenza del 13/01/2025 della CORTE APPELLO di TRIESTEdato avviso alle parti; udita la relazione svolta dal Consigliere PIETRO SILVESTRI; R.G. n. 22575/2025 CONSIDERATO IN FATTO E IN DIRITTO Visti gli atti, la sentenza impugnata (condanna per il reato previsto dagli artt. 337 - 582 - 612 cod. pen.), la nota spese della parte civile; Letto il motivo di ricorso, relativo al trattamento sanzionatorio; Ritenuto il motivo inammissibile, avendo la Corte spiegato compiutamente le ragioni per cui la pena inflitta sia stata ritenuta congrua;

Ritenuto, pertanto, che il ricorso deve essere dichiarato inammissibile, con la condanna del ricorrente al pagamento delle spese processuali e della somma di euro tremila in favore della Cassa delle ammende; Ritenuto in ragione del rito e del contributo in concreto fornito, di non dover procedere alla liquidazione per il grado di giudizio in favore della costituita parte civile; P. Q. M. Dichiara inammissibile il ricorso e condanna il ricorrente al pagamento delle spese processuali e della somma di euro tremila in favore della Cassa delle ammende.

Così deciso il 24 novembre 2025.