Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Helsingin HO 02.11.1983 429 AI generated

Court dismisses appeal against robbery conviction when related eviction case is already resolved by lower court.

Case Number Helsingin HO 02.11.1983 429
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Court of Appeal dismissed the defendant's appeal against a final conviction for aggravated robbery. The defendant argued that his criminal conduct had already led to his eviction from the rental property by a separate prior decision. The court ruled that the robbery case was already resolved by the lower court and thus the appeal was inadmissible.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

s. 33 of the Code of Judicial Procedure; An appeal against a final criminal conviction is inadmissible if the underlying civil dispute regarding the same premises has already been conclusively resolved by a separate judicial decision.

Keywords

AI generated
criminal appeal inadmissibility aggravated robbery conviction rental eviction decision finality of judgment separate judicial proceedings

Cited Legislation

AI generated
s. 33 of the Code of Judicial Procedure
AI generated
appeal_1981_eastern-finland__1320
Court dismissed robbery charge due to lack of intent to steal, but convicted defendants of theft and unlawful restraint.
appeal_1978_helsinki__11
Tenant loses lease rights after landlord proves permission for immoral conduct despite written warnings.
appeal_1979_eastern-finland__766
Court upheld conviction for aggravated assault, rejecting reformatio in peius request despite new evidence of life-threatening injury.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2022:34
Supreme Court allows summons by threat of trial in defendant's absence if no prior written response exists.
appeal_1975_helsinki__164
Tenant's eviction claim dismissed because landlord owns another apartment and failed to prove necessity for the specific unit.

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

A oli KO:ssa tuomittu rangaistukseen törkeästä ryöstöstä, johon hän oli syyllistynyt yhdessä kahden muun henkilön kanssa A:n asuman talon porraskäytävässä ja A:n B:ltä vuokraamassa asunnossa. Törkeä ryöstö oli kohdistunut samassa talossa asuvaan henkilöön. Päätös ei vielä ollut lainvoimainen. Sittemmin B:n kanteesta AO on katsonut A:n asunnossaan ja talon porraskäytävässä viettämänsä kerrotun pahantapaisen elämän vuoksi menettäneen vuokraoikeutensa ja velvoittanut hänet häädön uhalla muuttamaan huoneistosta.

A haki muutosta

HO, todeten rikosasian jo tulleen A:n rikoskumppaneiden osalta HO:ssa ratkaistuksi, jätti AO:n tuomion pysyväksi.

Läsnä: Poukka, Vilkama, Vallinrinne,

Pohjola (asiant.) ja Kaarni (asiant.) Esittelijä: Husso

Lainvoimainen