Criminal appeal requiring supplementary order for confiscation of value from proceeds of crime under German criminal procedure law
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Court of Justice (5th Criminal Senate) rejected the defendant’s appeal as groundless but amended the judgment of the Hamburg Regional Court to order the confiscation of €181,835 from the proceeds of the offense, leaving the remainder of the conviction in force with the defendant bearing the costs of the appellate proceedings. The dispute centered on the appellant’s challenge to the lower court’s conviction for a criminal offense, specifically contesting the handling of forfeiture regarding the value of criminal gains. The decisive legal basis was the German Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the review of appeals, where the court found no legal error to the defendant’s disadvantage but determined that the statutory requirement for the confiscation of the value of criminal gains had not been properly implemented in the initial judgment, necessitating the specific order for forfeiture of €181,835 as a supplementary operative outcome.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiertCriminal appeal requiring supplementary order for confiscation of value from proceeds of crime under German criminal procedure law: The dispute centered on the appellant’s challenge to the lower court’s conviction for a criminal offense, specifically contesting the handling of forfeiture regarding the value of criminal gains. The decisive legal basis was the German Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the review of appeals, where the court found no legal error to the defendant’s disadvantage but determined that the statutory requirement for the confiscation of the value of criminal gains had not been properly implemented in the initial judgment, necessitating the specific order for forfeiture of €181,835 as a supplementary operative outcome.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertVolltext
Die Revision des Angeklagten gegen das Urteil des Landgerichts Hamburg vom 20. September 2023 wird mit der Maßgabe als unbegründet verworfen, dass gegen den Angeklagten die Einziehung des Wertes von Taterträgen in Höhe von 181.835 Euro angeordnet ist (vgl. Antragsschrift des Generalbundesanwalts). Im Übrigen hat die Nachprüfung des Urteils auf Grund der Revisionsrechtfertigung keinen Rechtsfehler zum Nachteil des Angeklagten ergeben.
Der Beschwerdeführer hat die Kosten des Rechtsmittels zu tragen.
Cirener
Gericke
Mosbacher
Köhler
Werner