Admissibility of cost-shifting for expert reports aiding identification of a silent defendant in criminal proceedings

The German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) 6th Criminal Senate dismissed the defendant's immediate complaint against the cost allocation in the Lower Regional Court of Saarbrücken's judgment of October 10, 2024, ordering the defendant to bear the costs of the appellate proceedings. The dispute concerned the validity of the trial court's order for the defendant to pay for expert reports regarding explosion events and injury patterns. The court held that the cost allocation was lawful because the reports served the purpose of identifying the silent defendant during the main trial, thereby failing to meet the exceptional criteria for cost relief or reallocation under § 465 Abs. 2 StPO. The decision relied on §§ 465 Abs. 1 Satz 1 and Abs. 2 StPO to determine that the evidentiary value of the reports toward the defendant's identification justified the standard statutory cost allocation against the accused.