Inadmissibility of Appeal Against Penal Order in Traffic Violation Case

Cited for the procedure applied (simplified procedure) when not entering upon the appeal.

Cited for the competence-based referral of the matter back to the Public Prosecutor's Office.

Although the dispositive does not cite Art. 66 al. 1 LTF explicitly, the instruction mentions 'Auf eine Kostenauflage ist ausnahmsweise zu verzichten', which is realized by the instruction 'Es werden keine Kosten erhoben.' However, since the final order explicitly lists '2. Es werden keine Kosten erhoben.' and not a specific article for cost imposition/waiver, we rely strictly on the cited articles in the operative part (1.). The reasoning section in the consideration mentions 'Auf eine Kostenauflage ist ausnahmsweise zu verzichten', but no corresponding article (like Art. 66 BGG) is cited in the final disposition points (1., 2., 3.). Therefore, only articles explicitly listed in points 1, 2, or 3 are included. Looking again at point 2: 'Es werden keine Kosten erhoben.' - there is no corresponding BGG article cited next to this point. Therefore, I adhere strictly to the cited articles in the operative part (1, 2, 3). Since only procedural/jurisdictional articles are cited in point 1, and point 2 (costs) and 3 (communication) are not explicitly linked to an article in the operative list, only the main decisive articles remain.

Cited as the legal basis for not entering upon the appeal because the challenged criminal penalty order was not a final decision.