Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan HO 09.04.1965 AI generated

Court of Appeal dismisses appeal when lower court omits defendant's hearing for partial indictment.

Case Number Vaasan HO 09.04.1965
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Court of Appeal in Vaasa dismissed the appeal against a lower court's decision to exclude a portion of the indictment from the defendant's hearing. The lower court had issued a ruling on charges regarding tax evasion in 1956 and 1957 without hearing the accused, while the defendant's counsel argued the entire indictment should have been heard. The appellate court upheld the lower court's action, ruling that the omission of the hearing for the specific 1956-1957 charges was procedurally correct and did not warrant remanding the case.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Lainvoimainen; The court held that a lower court may rule on specific parts of an indictment without hearing the defendant if those parts concern facts distinct from the charged period, provided the omission does not violate fundamental procedural rights.

Keywords

AI generated
criminal procedure indictment hearing tax evasion procedural omission court of appeal lower court ruling defendant's rights

Cited Legislation

AI generated
RL 38:11
1958-60 tehdystä RL 38:11 :ssä tarkoitetusta veron kavaltamisesta eikä alioikeuden olisi pitänyt, kuulematta syytettyä, lausua syytteestä siltä osin kuin se koski v.
AI generated
appeal_1979_eastern-finland__1847
Court dismissed appeal claiming victim's new claims after case remand were inadmissible due to prior finality.
admin_1991_water-superior__189
Administrative court dismissed water supply damage claims as barred by general ten-year limitation period.
kko-precedent_2016_84
Supreme Court found a valid health excuse prevented the defendant from attending trial, ruling the lower court's dismissal of his right to be heard was erroneous.
appeal_1984_rovaniemi__358
Court dismisses criminal prosecution due to victim's delayed reporting and lack of public interest.
appeal_1974_helsinki__94
Tenant must vacate premises when rent arrears are deemed significant rather than negligible by court.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Kun asiamies oli valtuutettu syytetyn puolesta vastaamaan v. 1958-60 tehdystä RL 38:11 :ssä tarkoitetusta veron kavaltamisesta eikä alioikeuden olisi pitänyt, kuulematta syytettyä, lausua syytteestä siltä osin kuin se koski v. 1956 ja 1957 tapahtuneeksi väitettyä veron kavaltamista, hovioikeus on poistanut alioikeuden siltä osin antaman lausunnon ja jättänyt syyttäjän ja asianomistajan täällä esittämät vaatimukset jutussa viimeksi mainitulta osin tutkittavakseen ottamatta. (Ään.)

Eri mieltä oleva jäsen olisi palauttanut jutun alioikeuteen, koska syytettyä ei ollut kuultu syytteestä kokonaisuudessaan.

Lainvoimainen