Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
ATA/591/2005 • CJ GE ATA/591/2005 Généré par l'IA

Evidence Admissibility for Motive and Intent vs. Propensity

Numéro de cause ATA/591/2005
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Ouvrir la source officielle Miroir Entscheidsuche Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

A party challenged the admission of evidence related to prior acts, arguing that the evidence was irrelevant and improperly admitted to suggest propensity to commit the current offense. The court reasoned that the evidence of prior acts was properly admitted not to show character or propensity, but for the permissible purpose of demonstrating motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake, as supported by the relevant rule of evidence, thus affirming the trial court's decision to admit the evidence.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Evidence Admissibility for Motive and Intent vs. Propensity: The court reasoned that the evidence of prior acts was properly admitted not to show character or propensity, but for the permissible purpose of demonstrating motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake, as supported by the relevant rule of evidence, thus affirming the trial court's decision to admit the evidence.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
moyens de preuve sans pertinence preuve de l'intention coupable offre de preuve décision motivée preuve à futur motifs valables

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF
The court ordered the appellant to pay the costs of the federal proceedings.
Généré par l'IA
A/3990/2007
Admission of Prior Acts Evidence in Criminal Trial
A/4263/2005
Evidence Admissibility in Subsequent Proceeding Despite Prior Exclusion
A/3522/2007
Admissibility of Expert Testimony Referencing Prior Criminal Action
A/1270/2003
Evidence Admissibility and Sufficiency in Criminal Appeal
A/2294/2007
Appellate Review of Prior Bad Act Evidence Admissibility

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

The court ordered the appellant to pay the costs of the federal proceedings.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet



         

        

 



     

 !"#

#$$ %&$ 





'%&#(((((((((( 



 )   )*  



     !"# 

    &'(  !# '& !$$% ) *& ++++++++++   (&&,&-.&,&/&!$'&!$$%0

 -()&.12(&)&.&&( -&(32&)-&&40

   )(&& ))(  ) 2&(( 5 2&   '  5  3&.(.&266)&67(&& )-&&0

   &   2&( &&-( 2 )) 5 '&8   )(&3-&)-&&,9:(( )5)&;'&!$$<0

 ,=&<<&(!&)(-&&&,;!)-. ;>?%0

 ,=&%@/- &.-&&&6#$)-.!$$#0

"!!!#"!$$% #"# 



     

&=66)&60

&&),&&)-&&)&%)-.!$$%0

//-())-&&) ;'&!$$<0

(,6&)('325&'/(60

& 3 6-(- : & >A  &,   & 6(( =/&& '&&&8  )( (&& ) 9 )(8 ) ,&    & -&&&68   &: ' @  &6&&8 ) ,  &. 6((0  -(-&&&&3&8-&6-B),)  &/-&0&(&:-)& -&  &. 6((8 ;$$$  ;C0  )( (&&   )&@  )&  8 &,3( -- -B  ),8 &, 9 '& 5 =,&0

--&3  )( (&&8  )&8 5 *& ++++++++++ && 3= ,&-.&,&/&D

  )(& &.-&&&6E     FDB7@ 

)&6-(&&((--&3(':)&D

 @,8           

"!!!#"!$$%