Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Tutrakan (Bulgaria) lodged on 15 April 2024 – Criminal proceedings against YE
(Case C-263/24, Smiliev) 1
Language of the case: Bulgarian
Referring court
Rayonen sad Tutrakan
Party to the main proceedings
YE
Questions referred
1. Are Article 3(1) of Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA 1 of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings in conjunction with Article 2(a) of Council Framework Decision 2009/315/JHA of 26 February 2009 on the organisation and content of the exchange of information extracted from the criminal record between Member States to be interpreted as meaning that taking account of previous convictions handed down against the same person in other Member States means that the court before which new criminal proceedings are brought against the same person (the executing court) is obliged to take the view that the previous convictions recorded in the European Criminal Records Information System (ECRIS) and handed down in other Member States concern the same categories of punishable acts, which are classified in national law according to the danger to the public which they pose and are subject to entry in the criminal record of the State of the executing court? Where there are several categories of punishable acts, which are subject to entry in the criminal record under the national law of the executing court, the legal consequences of which in case of conviction are different, does it fall to the national court before which criminal proceedings are brought against a particular person to assess in each individual case into which category, under the national classification, the acts which gave rise to the previous convictions handed down in other Member States fall? In which cases must such an assessment be made?
2. Is Article 3(1) of Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA to be interpreted as meaning that it permits national legislation under which a court is obliged to disregard the previous convictions handed down in another Member State of the European Union in respect of acts which do not constitute criminal offences under the national law of the executing court?
____________
1 The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.
1 Council Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA of 24 July 2008 on taking account of convictions in the Member States of the European Union in the course of new criminal proceedings (OJ 2008 L 220, p. 32).