Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
91.2011.202 • PP TI 91.2011.202 Generato dall'IA

State v. Defendant (Traffic Violation and Leaving Scene Acquittal)

Numero d'incarto 91.2011.202
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Svizzera · Cantone Ticino (CH-TI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Accolto (Allowed)
Spese processuali a carico dell'autorità / Stato
Apri la fonte ufficiale Archivio Entscheidsuche Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The defendant was charged with a traffic violation and failing to uphold duties following an accident, stemming from an incident where they made a left turn, collided with an overtaking motorcyclist, and subsequently left the scene without rendering assistance as legally required. Despite the accusation proposing a fine, the court acquitted the defendant of all charges related to the traffic infraction and failure to assist, resulting in the state bearing the court costs and fees.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Art. 90 cifra, Art. 22 LTG, Art. 80 e segg. CPP, Art. 84 e segg. CPP, Art. 348 e segg. CPP, Art. 422 e segg. CPP; State v. Defendant (Traffic Violation and Leaving Scene Acquittal): Despite the accusation proposing a fine, the court acquitted the defendant of all charges related to the traffic infraction and failure to assist, resulting in the state bearing the court costs and fees.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
infrazione alle norme della circolazione decisioni incidentali delitto di fuga Stato di diritto pena accessoria obbligo di assistenza

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
Art. 90 cifra
richiamati gli art. 90 cifra 1 e 92 cpv.
Art. 22 LTG
This provision is cited in the section listing the applicable law before the ruling, but since the primary order (1) is a full acquittal, and no specific article is mentioned in the operative part to support the acquittal, and no other provisions from the operative part are substantive/procedural ground-setting, this one must be excluded based on the strict rule.
Art. 80 e segg. CPP
This provision is cited in the section listing the applicable law before the ruling, but since the primary order (1) is a full acquittal, and no specific article is mentioned in the operative part to support the acquittal, and no other provisions from the operative part are substantive/procedural ground-setting, this one must be excluded based on the strict rule.
Art. 84 e segg. CPP
This provision is cited in the section listing the applicable law before the ruling, but since the primary order (1) is a full acquittal, and no specific article is mentioned in the operative part to support the acquittal, and no other provisions from the operative part are substantive/procedural ground-setting, this one must be excluded based on the strict rule.
Art. 348 e segg. CPP
This provision is cited in the section listing the applicable law before the ruling, but since the primary order (1) is a full acquittal, and no specific article is mentioned in the operative part to support the acquittal, and no other provisions from the operative part are substantive/procedural ground-setting, this one must be excluded based on the strict rule.
Art. 422 e segg. CPP
This provision is cited in the section listing the applicable law before the ruling, but since the primary order (1) is a full acquittal, and no specific article is mentioned in the operative part to support the acquittal, and no other provisions from the operative part are substantive/procedural ground-setting, this one must be excluded based on the strict rule.
Generato dall'IA
91.2013.9
State v. Defendant (Traffic Violation Acquittal)
91.2013.27
State v. Defendant (Traffic Violation Acquittal)
91.2013.270
State v. Defendant (Traffic Violation Acquittal)
10.2009.57
State v. Defendant (Traffic Violation Acquittal)
10.2004.378
State v. Defendant (Acquittal on Traffic Violation and Failure to Render Aid)

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
Art. 22 LTG

This provision is cited in the section listing the applicable law before the ruling, but since the primary order (1) is a full acquittal, and no specific article is mentioned in the operative part to support the acquittal, and no other provisions from the operative part are substantive/procedural ground-setting, this one must be excluded based on the strict rule.

Art. 80 e segg. CPP

This provision is cited in the section listing the applicable law before the ruling, but since the primary order (1) is a full acquittal, and no specific article is mentioned in the operative part to support the acquittal, and no other provisions from the operative part are substantive/procedural ground-setting, this one must be excluded based on the strict rule.

Art. 84 e segg. CPP

This provision is cited in the section listing the applicable law before the ruling, but since the primary order (1) is a full acquittal, and no specific article is mentioned in the operative part to support the acquittal, and no other provisions from the operative part are substantive/procedural ground-setting, this one must be excluded based on the strict rule.

Art. 348 e segg. CPP

This provision is cited in the section listing the applicable law before the ruling, but since the primary order (1) is a full acquittal, and no specific article is mentioned in the operative part to support the acquittal, and no other provisions from the operative part are substantive/procedural ground-setting, this one must be excluded based on the strict rule.

Art. 422 e segg. CPP

This provision is cited in the section listing the applicable law before the ruling, but since the primary order (1) is a full acquittal, and no specific article is mentioned in the operative part to support the acquittal, and no other provisions from the operative part are substantive/procedural ground-setting, this one must be excluded based on the strict rule.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Incarto n. 91.2011.202 35628/207 · Bellinzona 6 giugno 2012 · Sentenza In nome della Repubblica e Cantone Ticino Il Presidente della Pretura penale Marco Kraushaar

sedente con Petra Vanoni in qualità di segretaria per giudicare

IM 1 , difeso da: DI 1

visto il decreto d’accusa n. 35628/207 del 9 dicembre 2011;

preso atto che AINQ 1 ritiene l’imputato autore colpevole di infrazione alle norme della circolazione e di inosservanza dei doveri in caso d'infortunio

per avere, il 9 agosto 2011 a __________, alla guida della vettura BE __________, eseguito una manovra di svolta a sinistra

collidendo con un motociclista sopraggiungente da tergo in fase di sorpasso. In seguito si allontanava omettendo di osservare i doveri imposti dalla legge in caso di incidente;

e propone la condanna alla multa di fr. 400.- oltre alla tassa di giustizia di fr. 80.- e alle spese di fr. 80.-;

rilevato che il difensore chiede il proscioglimento;

richiamati gli art. 90 cifra 1 e 92 cpv. 1 LCStr in relazione con gli art. 26 cpv. 1, 34 cpv. 3, 51 cpv. 1 e 3 LCStr, 13 cpv. 1 ONC; 80 e segg., 84 e segg., 348 e segg., 422 e segg. CPP; 22 LTG;

al termine dell’odierno dibattimento e dopo aver motivato oralmente la decisione;

pronuncia 1. IM 1 è prosciolto dall’imputazione di infrazione alle norme della circolazione e di inosservanza dei doveri in caso d'infortunio per i fatti descritti nel decreto d'accusa n. 35628/207 del 9 dicembre 2011.

2. La tassa di giustizia e le spese giudiziarie di complessivi fr. 360.- (trecentosessanta) sono a carico dello Stato.

Non si assegnano indennità.

3. Questo giudizio può essere impugnato mediante appello; lo stesso va annunciato alla Pretura penale entro

10 giorni dalla comunicazione della sentenza, per scritto oppure oralmente a verbale. Entro lo stesso termine può essere chiesta la motivazione della sentenza.

4. Intimazione a:

- seduta stante

- per raccomandata

terzi implicati · P_GLOSS_TERZI

Il presidente: La segretaria:

IM 1

fr. 230.- tassa di giustizia

fr. 130.- spese giudiziarie

fr. 360.- totale