Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Helsingin HO 10.09.1985 1050 AI generated

Court allows theft conviction despite prosecutor's request for only assault charge due to lack of legal basis.

Case Number Helsingin HO 10.09.1985 1050
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court upheld the defendant's conviction for theft, rejecting the prosecutor's request to charge only for assault. Although the defendant did not use violence, he forcibly took property while restraining the victim, which constitutes theft under Finnish law. The court ruled that the prosecutor's limited charging request could not override the statutory definition of the crime committed.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

s. 10 of the Penal Code; s. 10 of the Penal Code: The court may convict for theft even if the prosecution requests only a lesser charge, provided the facts legally constitute theft.

Keywords

AI generated
theft conviction prosecutor request assault charge Finnish Penal Code criminal liability court discretion property taking

Cited Legislation

AI generated
s. 10 of the Penal Code
AI generated
kko-precedent_1990_9
Attempted murder reduced to aggravated assault when defendant saved victim's life after attack.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2018:47
Supreme Court holds theft of 6,000 euro electronics is not 'very valuable' for aggravated theft under Finnish Penal Code.
kko-precedent_1989_99
Supreme Court dismisses traffic charge against driver who followed rules when other driver illegally entered opposing lane.
appeal_1981_eastern-finland__1460
Court dismisses assault charge when defendant's excessive force was justified by emergency self-defense.
appeal_1983_rovaniemi__1298
Excessive defense justified by necessity but deemed disproportionate and unnecessary, resulting in full criminal liability.

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 öiseen aikaan Helsingin linja-autoasemalla anastanut B:n taskuista viinipullon ja kolme avainta sisältäneen nahkakukkaron, arvoltaan yhteensä 168 markkaa, pitäen B:tä samanaikaisesti rinnuksista kiinni. A ei tosin ollut tehnyt muuta väkivaltaa, mutta B ei ollut uskaltanut tehdä vastarintaa, vaan oli A:n suoritettua anastuksen heti lähtenyt pakenemaan. A tuomittiin rangaistukseen varkaudesta huolimatta siitä, että virallinen syyttäjä oli raastuvanoikeudessa ja muutoksenhakemuksessaan hovioikeudelle vaatinut A:n tuomitsemista ainoastaan näpistyksestä.

Läsnä: Liukko, Mäki ja Vihuri (apuj.) Esittelijä: Soininen

Lainvoimainen