5.  The applicant was born in 1973 and lives in Târgu Jiu. 6.  On 15 November 2002 the applicant and M.P. were committed for trial on charges of robbery and aggravated murder. Throughout the proceedings the applicant pleaded innocent.
In his statements to the police and the prosecutor, the applicant’s co‑accused declared that he had committed the acts together with the applicant. He changed his position before the court, stating that he had acted alone and that the applicant had not participated in the alleged crimes. 7.  On 16 December 2003 the Gorj County Court convicted the applicant of murder and sentenced him to twenty-three years’ imprisonment. It based its decision on the evidence in the file, including the statements made by both the accused during the investigations and in court, as well as on witness testimony and forensic evidence. The court concluded that both defendants had committed the crimes. 8.  On 28 June 2004 the Craiova Court of Appeal quashed that decision and remitted the case to the County Court for re-examination. 9.  On 13 July 2004 the Gorj County Court heard evidence from the applicant and the co-defendant. On 20 December 2004 it found the applicant guilty and sentenced him to twenty-three years in prison. 10.  The defendants appealed. The Craiova Court of Appeal re‑examined the merits of the case. It examined the evidence already gathered, heard evidence from the defendants, requested new evidence and was addressed by defence counsel and the prosecutor. 11.  On 22 September 2005 it acquitted the applicant as it considered that the evidence in the file did not convincingly link the applicant to the robbery. 12.  The prosecutor appealed in cassation on the ground that the Court of Appeal had wrongly assessed the evidence and had relied exclusively on the evidence administered directly before it, ignoring the evidence adduced during the prosecution and before the lower courts. The High Court of Cassation and Justice was addressed by defence counsel and the prosecutor. It allowed the defendants to address it before the end of the hearing (ultimul cuvânt al inculpatului). 13.  In a final decision of 8 February 2006 the High Court quashed the Court of Appeal’s decision, re-examined the evidence in the file and upheld the County Court’s decision of 20 December 2004. The High Court found that the Court of Appeal had not weighed the evidence properly and had ignored relevant information from the file, notably the statements made by the co-defendant immediately after the commission of the crimes, whereby he had incriminated the applicant. It reassessed the evidence and found that the first statements given by the applicant’s co‑defendant were corroborated by the remaining evidence.