Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Ordinanza — n. 15298/2026 — snpen AI generated

Cassation court dismisses appeal claiming lack of reasoning on sentencing, ruling it falls within trial judge's discretion.

Case Number Ordinanza — n. 15298/2026 — snpen
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Italy (IT)
Decision Date
Outcome Inadmissible
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court declared the appeal inadmissible, rejecting the claim that the sentencing determination lacked sufficient reasoning. The appellant argued the penalty calculation was unmotivated, but the court held that sentencing falls within the trial judge's discretionary power under Articles 132 and 133 of the Penal Code. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as it did not reveal arbitrary reasoning or logical flaws subject to cassation review.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 132, 133 cod. pen.: The determination of the punitive treatment belongs to the discretion of the judge of first instance and escapes the review of legality unless it results in mere arbitrariness or illogical reasoning.

Keywords

AI generated
sentencing discretion lack of reasoning cassation inadmissibility penal code articles judicial arbitrariness

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 132 cod. pen.
Art. 133 cod. pen.
AI generated
Ordinanza — n. 35497/2023 — snciv
Court dismisses tax authority's claim against administrator for IRAP and VAT debts, ruling liability limited to income taxes.
Ordinanza — n. 12981/2026 — snpen
Cassation court dismisses appeal against extortion conviction, rejecting claims of insufficient evidence and improper sentencing.
Ordinanza — n. 2724/2022 — snciv
Cassation court declares tax appeal extinguished due to administrative self-annulment of liquidation notices.
Ordinanza — n. 24962/2026 — snpen
Cassation court dismisses appeal against sentencing, ruling discretion under Articles 132 and 133 of the Penal Code is sufficient.
Ordinanza — n. 17053/2025 — snpen
Italian Court dismisses appeal against robbery conviction for citing already reviewed facts as new arguments.

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

posto da: VENTALORO RICCARDO nato a CATANIA il 06/05/1973 avverso la sentenza del 16/05/2025 della CORTE APPELLO di CATANIA dato avviso alle parti; udita la relazione svolta dal Consigliere GIUSEPPE NICASTRO;RITENUTO IN FATTO E

CONSIDERATO IN DIRITTO

Letto il ricorso di Riccardo Ventaloro; considerato che l'unico motivo di ricorso, con cui si deduce il difetto di motivazione in ordine alla determinazione del trattamento sanzionatorio, è manifestamente infondato in quanto la graduazione della pena, anche in relazione agli aumenti e alle diminuzioni previsti per le circostanze aggravanti e attenuanti, rientra nella discrezionalità del giudice di merito, che la esercita in aderenza ai principi enunciati negli artt. 132 e 133 cod. pen., e sfugge al sindacato di legittimità qualora, come nella specie, non sia frutto di mero arbitrio o di ragionamento illogico (si veda, in proposito, la pag. 4); rilevato, 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. P.Q P.Q.M