<\/p>\n
The Supervisory Court<\/strong> of Milan rejected the application for probationary custody, since the convicted still had to expiate a residual sentence exceeding the limit of 4 years of imprisonment and arguing that the convicted should atone for a prison impediment offense<\/strong>, or a conviction for aggravated robbery, included in the provision pursuant to art. 4 bis penitentiary system<\/strong>.<\/p>\n The defense correctly objected that the penalty for the crime of aggravated robbery had already been declared extinct following the positive outcome of thereliance on therapeutic trial<\/strong> and that the cumulation measure<\/strong> issued by the Milan Public Prosecutor's Office, on which an application for admission to probationary assignment to the social service was proposed in particular cases, determined a residual penalty to be expiated<\/strong> equal to 4 years and 9 months of imprisonment and therefore less than the 6-year limit set by Presidential Decree no. 309 of 1990, art. 94.<\/p>\n The convict represented that as a result of the presumed<\/strong> equal to 4 years and 8 months and the concession of the early release<\/strong> for 180 days, he still had to execute a residual of only 4 years and 9 months of imprisonment which made the request for probationary assignment to the social service in particular cases<\/strong>, having lowered the limit of the sentence to be expiated below the threshold of 6 years. The sentence of the Constitutional Court n. 253\/2019 eliminates the obligatory nature of collaboration with the justice system provided for by art. 4 bis penitentiary system and the obligation for the "non-collaborator" to undertake a judgment to verify a situation of impossibility<\/strong> or bad debt of a useful collaboration<\/strong>, which condition for obtaining i premium permissions<\/strong> according to art. 4 bis paragraph 1-bis penitentiary system.<\/p>\n Therefore, the foreclosure to the admissibility of the premium permit for i convicted of a hindering crime<\/strong> that is, the principle according to which the "condemned impediment" determines regardless of a dangerousness judgment against the same has been eliminated, still remaining objective links with organized crime.
\nThe Supreme Court therefore annulled the order issued by the Supervisory Court of Milan.<\/p>\nThe clarifications of the Constitution Court on the impediment and award permits:<\/h2>\n
\nLikewise, the obligation for the "condemned impediment<\/strong>"That he did not collaborate with the Justice to prove that his collaboration would still be irrelevant.<\/p>\nThe clarifications of the Constitutional Court on the impediment and probation offense:<\/h2>\n