Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Vaasan HO 13.09.1983 1038/83 AI generated

Appeal court merged conditional sentences and ordered payment of combined fines instead of waiving them.

Case Number Vaasan HO 13.09.1983 1038/83
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Partially Allowed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The prosecution alone appealed, and the Court of Appeal merged the defendant's new conditional sentence with a prior one involving 50 and 30 days' fines. The court ordered a new probation period starting from its decision and imposed a combined 70 days' fine. While one judge argued the fines should remain unpaid, the majority ruled that the defendant must pay the total amount.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Section 3 of the Probation Act 1976; Section 3 of the Fines Act 1976: When a new conditional sentence is merged with an existing one, the associated fines are combined and the defendant remains liable for the total sum.

Keywords

AI generated
conditional sentence merger probation period extension fines liability appeal court decision criminal execution

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Section 3 of the Probation Act 1976
Majanen: LM 1976 s. 326 ja 332
Section 3 of the Fines Act 1976
Majanen: LM 1976 s. 326 ja 332

Cited Case Law

AI generated
KouHO T:1526/82
oheissakosta ovat antaneet KouHO T:1526/82,
HelHO T:712
A:28.12.1982 ja HelHO T:712, A:10.5.1983.
AI generated
appeal_1983_helsinki__712
Court combined two suspended sentences and added a supplementary fine to the earlier one.
appeal_1982_kouvola__1526
Court allows new fine when conditional sentence is reclassified, permitting concurrent fines to remain valid.
kko-precedent_1997_13
Supreme Court allows joint prison sentence in appeal court under Criminal Code joint punishment rules.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2020:63
Supreme Court allows deduction of community service from fine when service was harsher than fine.
kko-other_2003_259
Supreme Court allows removal of fine when conditional sentence is suspended and fine is not executed.

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

Syyttäjä yksin haki muutosta.

Hovioikeus yhdisti syytetylle jutussa tuomitun ehdollisen vankeusrangaistuksen tälle aikaisemmin tuomittuun ehdolliseen vapausrangaistukseen. Toisessa jutussa syytetty oli tuomittu 50 päiväsakon ja toisessa 30 päiväsakon oheissakkoon.

Hovioikeus määräsi uuden koetusajan, joka alkoi hovioikeuden päätöksestä, ja tuomitsi yhden 70 päiväsakon oheissakon. (Ään.).

Eri mieltä ollut jäsen katsoi, että jutuissa tuomitut oheissakot jäivät syytetyn maksettaviksi.

Ks. Majanen: LM 1976 s. 326 ja 332

Eri mieltä olevan jäsenen lausunnon mukaisen ratkaisun

oheissakosta ovat antaneet KouHO T:1526/82,

A:28.12.1982 ja HelHO T:712, A:10.5.1983. Ratkaisut

ovat tässä rekisterissä.

Lainvoimainen