CONSEQUENCES OF THE DECISION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF ROMANIA NO. 2/2017 ON THE EXTRAORDINARY APPEAL PATH OF THE REVIEW
AbstractThe central element of this extraordinary appeal is the judicial error. The review involves finding a legal error in the criminal case settled by a final judgment, which was based on an erroneous assessment of the state of affairs. Exercising appeals does not create a new procedural report, but only extends the initial report in this new procedural phase. In our judicial system, the unanimous classification is that appeals are divided into two categories: ordinary ways and extraordinary ways. Thus, before the decision, the case under Article 453 (1) (a) could be invoked as a ground for review only in favor of the convicted person or of the one to whom the waiver of the punishment or deferment of the punishment or termination of the criminal proceedings, if the review is aimed at obtaining an acquittal. Therefore, this case of revision could not be used to the detriment of the person who was acquitted or who was ordered to terminate the criminal proceedings, with the aim of reaching a decision on conviction, renunciation of the punishment or postponement of the application punishment.
1. Neagu, Criminal Procedure Treaty, Ed. Pro, 1997.
2. T. Tanoviceanu, Treaty of Law and Criminal Procedure, vol. V, Bucharest, 1927, Printing, "CurierulJudiciar".
3. E. Decusară, Problems of Criminal Procedure. Review in Criminal Procedure, Ed. The Judicial Courier, Bucharest, 1992.
4. M. Udroiu, A. Andone-Bontaş, G. Bodoroncea, M. Bulancea, V. Constantinescu, D. Grădinaru, C. Jderu, I. Kuglay, C. Meceanu, L. Postelnicu, I. Tocan, AR Trandafir, Code of criminal proceedings. Comment on articles, Ed. C.H. Beck, Bucharest, 2015.
5. P. Buneci, Gh. Serban, I. Ciolca, I. Dragnea, A. Vasilache, S. Cretu, I. Vasilache, V. Stoica, D. Titian, M. Jiganie-Şerban, New Criminal Procedure Code. Notes. Correlations. Explanations, Ed. C.H.Beck, Bucharest, 2014.
6. P. Bouzat, J. Pinatel. Traite de droit penal et de criminologie. Tome II, LibrairieDalloz, Paris, 1963.
B) Collections, articles, notes:
1. M. V. Tudoran, The necessity of introducing in the Criminal Procedure Code a new case of revision of final criminal law rulings on Community law.in Law no. 10/2009.
2. H.C.C.J., criminal section, dec.no. 3055 of 12 May 2006; https://legeaz.net/spete-penal-iccj-2006/decizia-3055-2006.
3. S.C., criminal section, dec.nr.853 of 14 February 2002,https://legeaz.net/spete-drept-penal-csj-2003/decizia-853-2002.
4. H.C.C.J., criminal section, dec.nr.1869 of 17 March 2005; https://legeaz.net/spete-penal-iccj-2005/decizia-1869-2005.
5. S.C., criminal section, dec.nr.2101 of 26 September 1997; https://legeaz.net/spete-drept-penal-csj-1997/decizia-2101-1997.
C) National and European legislation:
6. Constitutional Court Decision 2/2017, published in the Official Gazette of Romania, Part I, on 5 May 2017.
D) ECHR Jurisprudence:
1. Case Hronsby v. Greece, Case 18357/91 of 19 March 1997.
2. Mitrea v. Romania, no. 26105/03, July 29, 2008.