Confiscation of criminal proceeds: discretionary waiver of €15,000 value of illicit gains
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Federal Court of Justice (5th Criminal Senate) dismissed the defendant's appeal as unfounded, upholding the lower court's conviction, but modified the sentence by abolishing the confiscation of €15,000 in proceeds of crime with the consent of the Federal Public Prosecutor. The dispute concerned a criminal appeal where the defendant challenged the original judgment of the Regional Court of Berlin, specifically targeting the ancillary confiscation order. While the appellate review found no legal error to the defendant's detriment regarding the primary conviction, the court applied the doctrine of discretionary waiver (*Entsagung*) for confiscation proceedings, determining that the strict enforcement of the specific monetary amount was no longer necessary, thereby reducing the financial burden on the defendant while maintaining the remainder of the original judgment.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiertConfiscation of criminal proceeds: discretionary waiver of €15,000 value of illicit gains: The dispute concerned a criminal appeal where the defendant challenged the original judgment of the Regional Court of Berlin, specifically targeting the ancillary confiscation order. While the appellate review found no legal error to the defendant's detriment regarding the primary conviction, the court applied the doctrine of discretionary waiver (*Entsagung*) for confiscation proceedings, determining that the strict enforcement of the specific monetary amount was no longer necessary, thereby reducing the financial burden on the defendant while maintaining the remainder of the original judgment.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertZitierte Rechtsprechung
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertVolltext
Mit Zustimmung des Generalbundesanwalts wird von der Einziehung des Wertes von Taterträgen in Höhe von 15.000 Euro abgesehen (Fall II.11 der Urteilsgründe); in dieser Höhe entfällt der Ausspruch. Die Revision der Angeklagten gegen das Urteil des Landgerichts Berlin vom 18. November 2022 wird im Übrigen als unbegründet verworfen, da die Nachprüfung des Urteils auf Grund der Revisionsrechtfertigung keinen Rechtsfehler zum Nachteil der Angeklagten ergeben hat.
Die Beschwerdeführerin hat die Kosten des Rechtsmittels zu tragen (vgl. BGH, Beschluss vom 26. Mai 2021 – 5 StR 458/20, NStZ-RR 2021, 229).
Cirener
Mosbacher
Köhler
Resch
von Häfen