Criminal appeals: rejection of revisions and correction of clerical error in sentence allocation between charged and uncharged offenses
Legislator-Zusammenfassung
KI-generiertThe Bundesgerichtshof (BGH) 5th Criminal Senate rejected the appeals of the defendants against the judgment of the Berlin Regional Court dated August 1, 2023, upholding the conviction and sentencing, with a minor correction clarifying that a sentence originally assigned to a non-charged offense due to a clerical error is deemed to apply to charged Offense 5. The dispute involved multiple criminal offenses prosecuted in the lower court, with the defendants challenging the judgment on appeal. The decisive legal basis was the court's determination that the appeals were unfounded, resulting in the confirmation of the lower court's factual findings and legal application, while imposing the costs of the legal remedy on each complainant.
Legislator-Regeste
KI-generiertCriminal appeals: rejection of revisions and correction of clerical error in sentence allocation between charged and uncharged offenses: The dispute involved multiple criminal offenses prosecuted in the lower court, with the defendants challenging the judgment on appeal. The decisive legal basis was the court's determination that the appeals were unfounded, resulting in the confirmation of the lower court's factual findings and legal application, while imposing the costs of the legal remedy on each complainant.
Schlagwörter
KI-generiertVerwandte Entscheide
KI-generiertVolltext
Die Revisionen der Angeklagten gegen das Urteil des Landgerichts Berlin vom 1. August 2023 werden als unbegründet verworfen, diejenige des Angeklagten N. mit der Klarstellung, dass die infolge eines Schreibversehens für die nicht angeklagte Tat 3 bestimmte Strafe als für Tat 5 festgesetzt gilt.
Jeder Beschwerdeführer hat die Kosten seines Rechtsmittels zu tragen.
Cirener
Mosbacher
Köhler
Resch
von Häfen