Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan HO 15.04.1977 230/77 AI generated

Attempted theft dismissed because defendant voluntarily abandoned the crime after finding insufficient money.

Case Number Vaasan HO 15.04.1977 230/77
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court dismissed the charges against the defendant who attempted to rob a business but voluntarily abandoned the attempt upon discovering only a few coins. Although the defendant entered the premises with the intent to steal money, they caused no damage to the business's property. The prosecution's case failed because the defendant's voluntary withdrawal from the crime negated the completion of the offense under the relevant criminal code provisions.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Syyte rikoslain 4 luvun 2 §:n säännökset huomioon ottaen hylättiin, kun syytetty omasta tahdostaan luopui rikoksestaan tunkeutuaan liikkeeseen ja löytäessään siellä vain muutama kolikko.

Keywords

AI generated
attempted theft voluntary abandonment criminal intent no damage caused dismissed charges

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Rikoslaki 4 luvun 2 §
AI generated
kko-precedent_2002_112
Attempted theft of valuable goods constitutes a crime when the actor causes real danger of completion.
kko-precedent_2003_78
Supreme Court held that fraud attempt occurred when loan application was signed, but acquittal granted for attempted fraud due to voluntary abandonment.
kko-precedent_1988_54
Attempted theft conviction upheld where property damage was intentional and theft intent existed despite lack of completed act.
kko-precedent_1988_109
Supreme Court reduces attempted theft conviction to completed theft for continuous series of burglaries.
kko-precedent_1993_103
Attempted murder reduced to one attempt due to lack of firm intent after weapon jamming.

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

Syytetty oli tunkeutunut liikkeeseen tarkoituksenaan anastaa ainoastaan rahaa. Liikkeessä oli kuitenkin rahaa vain muutama kolikko, minkä vuoksi syytetty omasta tahdostaan luopui yrityksestään anastamatta mitään muutakaan liikkeessä ollutta omaisuutta. Kun syytetty ei ollut liikkeeseen tunkeutuessaan vahingoittanut liikkeen omaisuutta, syyte rikoslain 4 luvun 2 §:n säännökset huomioon ottaen hylättiin.

Lainvoimainen