# C_2017392EN.01000901.xml

| 20.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 392/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/9

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 21 September 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sofiyski Rayonen sad — Bulgaria) — Trayan Beshkov v Sofiyska rayonna prokuratura

(Case C-171/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Framework Decision 2008/675/JHA - Scope - Taking into account, in the course of new criminal proceedings, a previous conviction handed down in another Member State, in order to impose an overall sentence - National procedure for prior recognition of that conviction - Altering the arrangements for enforcing the sentence imposed in the other Member State))

(2017/C 392/12)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Referring court

Sofiyski Rayonen sad

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Trayan Beshkov

Applicant:

Defendant: Sofiyska rayonna prokuratura

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 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 must be interpreted as meaning that it is applicable to a national procedure that is concerned with the imposition, for the purposes of execution, of an overall custodial sentence that takes into account the sentence imposed on that person by a national court and also that imposed following a previous conviction handed down by a court of another Member State against the same person for different facts. |
| --- | --- |

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 must be interpreted as meaning that it is applicable to a national procedure that is concerned with the imposition, for the purposes of execution, of an overall custodial sentence that takes into account the sentence imposed on that person by a national court and also that imposed following a previous conviction handed down by a court of another Member State against the same person for different facts.

| 2. | Framework Decision 2008/675 must be interpreted as precluding the possibility that it should be a prerequisite of account being taken, in a Member State, of a previous conviction handed down by a court of another Member State that a national procedure for prior recognition of that conviction by the courts with jurisdiction in the former Member State, such as that laid down in Articles 463 to 466 of the Nakazatelno-protsesualen kodeks (Code of Criminal Procedure), be implemented. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Framework Decision 2008/675 must be interpreted as precluding the possibility that it should be a prerequisite of account being taken, in a Member State, of a previous conviction handed down by a court of another Member State that a national procedure for prior recognition of that conviction by the courts with jurisdiction in the former Member State, such as that laid down in Articles 463 to 466 of the Nakazatelno-protsesualen kodeks (Code of Criminal Procedure), be implemented.

| 3. | Article 3(3) of Framework Decision 2008/675 must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which provides that a national court, seised of an application for the imposition, for the purposes of execution, of an overall custodial sentence that takes into account, inter alia, the sentence imposed following a previous conviction handed down by a court of another Member State, may alter for that purpose the arrangements for execution of that latter sentence. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Article 3(3) of Framework Decision 2008/675 must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which provides that a national court, seised of an application for the imposition, for the purposes of execution, of an overall custodial sentence that takes into account, inter alia, the sentence imposed following a previous conviction handed down by a court of another Member State, may alter for that purpose the arrangements for execution of that latter sentence.

---

(1)  OJ C 200, 6.6.2016.

1

---