Withdrawal of Criminal Opposition and Dismissal of Proceedings

Used to strike the proceedings from the records after the opposition was withdrawn.

The text mentions § 1 in the context of returning the file, but the provision itself is not explicitly cited in the dispositive orders 1, 2, or 3. The only explicit citation relevant to the merits/procedure in the dispositive is Art. 210 CPP, which dictates the outcome.

This article justifies striking the proceedings and making the accusation decree executive.

Although the decision cites Swiss procedural law (CPP), the reference to costs in the dispositive (Order 3) implies the application of the relevant cost provision for cantonal decisions, which often mirrors Art. 66 LTF for federal matters, but since this is a cantonal court decision (Pretura penale Ticino), and no specific cantonal cost provision is cited alongside the orders, I must check if any cost provision is cited. Order 3 imposes costs without citing a specific procedural cost rule (like Art. 426 CPP or similar). Given the constraints, I can only include provisions explicitly cited in the dispositive. Since Art. 210 CPP is the only procedural/substantive rule cited in orders 1 and 2, and Order 3 imposes costs without citing a reference, I will stick strictly to the cited articles.