Sect. 606, par. 1, e), as modified by Law 46, enacted on Februray 20th, 2006 introduced the chance to appeal to the Court of cassation in case of inconsistent reasoning and extended control on its existence and on other flaws and lack of obvious logic over the text of the contested decision, namely ࢠto other acts the process specified in the grounds of burdenࢠ. The renewed provision seems to properly reappoint the ࢠdistortion of the evidenceࢠ, i.e. the omitted or distorted evidence that could be relevant and conclusive one, in the peculiar context of the grounds' vice. After a general review of the obligation to state reasons for judicial decisions, we analyze the innovative status of the vice of ࢠdistortion of evidenceࢠand the conditions and the limits - defined by the law - within we can contest a resolution for illegitimacy. Then, we outline the systematic spin-off brought by the new form of sect. 606, par. 1, e) on some institutions in the code of criminal procedure. Finally, we make the role of the Court of cassation clear in the modern criminal trial, since the 2006 reform gave no definite answer on this fundamental aspect of the question.

Il sindacato della Corte di cassazione sul travisamento della prova

2010

Abstract

Sect. 606, par. 1, e), as modified by Law 46, enacted on Februray 20th, 2006 introduced the chance to appeal to the Court of cassation in case of inconsistent reasoning and extended control on its existence and on other flaws and lack of obvious logic over the text of the contested decision, namely ࢠto other acts the process specified in the grounds of burdenࢠ. The renewed provision seems to properly reappoint the ࢠdistortion of the evidenceࢠ, i.e. the omitted or distorted evidence that could be relevant and conclusive one, in the peculiar context of the grounds' vice. After a general review of the obligation to state reasons for judicial decisions, we analyze the innovative status of the vice of ࢠdistortion of evidenceࢠand the conditions and the limits - defined by the law - within we can contest a resolution for illegitimacy. Then, we outline the systematic spin-off brought by the new form of sect. 606, par. 1, e) on some institutions in the code of criminal procedure. Finally, we make the role of the Court of cassation clear in the modern criminal trial, since the 2006 reform gave no definite answer on this fundamental aspect of the question.
2010
it
Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Campilongo_Valentina_IlsindacatodellaCortedicassazionesultravisamentodellaprova.pdf

accesso solo da BNCF e BNCR

Tipologia: Altro materiale allegato
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati
Dimensione 1.23 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.23 MB Adobe PDF

I documenti in UNITESI sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14242/302469
Il codice NBN di questa tesi è URN:NBN:IT:UNIBO-302469