Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Rovaniemen HO 04.09.1985 1236/85 AI generated

Court applies aggravating circumstance for repeat offender despite no prior conviction for same crime type.

Case Number Rovaniemen HO 04.09.1985 1236/85
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court sentenced the defendant to imprisonment for selling alcohol containing professional-grade substances, applying an aggravating circumstance under Section 4 of Chapter 6 of the Penal Code. Although the defendant had no prior convictions for similar offenses, his criminal record showed over 20 convictions between 1964 and the present for property, forgery, and traffic offenses. The court determined that the frequency and nature of these past crimes demonstrated clear disregard for legal prohibitions, justifying the enhanced penalty.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Section 4 of Chapter 6 of the Penal Code; The court may apply an aggravating circumstance for repeat offenders even without a prior conviction for the same type of offense if the defendant's overall criminal record demonstrates clear disregard for the law.

Keywords

AI generated
aggravating circumstance repeat offender criminal record Penal Code alcohol sale disregard for law sentencing enhancement

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Section 4 of Chapter 6 of the Penal Code
AI generated
appeal_1985_helsinki__2648
Court rejects recidivism aggravation due to insufficient time gap between prior and new crimes.
kko-other_1995_4260
Supreme Court allows combined sentence to be mandatory when prior conditional sentence was already mandatory.
kko-precedent_2010_77
Supreme Court dismisses charges for acts committed on the defendant's 15th birthday due to strict liability age interpretation.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2023:74
Supreme Court holds foreign judgment need not appear in register if specific details submitted by defendant. Verdict: allowed.
appeal_1983_eastern-finland__969
Court of Appeal separated two continuous selling offenses into distinct crimes due to a prior judgment gap.

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 tuomittiin rangaistukseen ammattimaisesta alkoholipitoisen aineen myynnistä. Vaikka A:ta ei aiemmin ollut tuomittu rangaistukseen vastaavanlaisista rikoksista, häneen sovellettiin RL 6 luvun 2 §:n 4 kohdan koventamisperustetta, koska hänen rikosrekisteristä ilmenevän aikaisemman rikollisuutensa ja nyt kysymyksessä olleen rikoksen suhde osoitti rikosten lukumäärän huomioon ottaen A:ssa ilmeistä piittaamattomuutta lain kielloista ja käskyistä. (Rikosrekisterin mukaan A oli vuodesta 1964 lähtien suhteellisen lyhyin väliajoin yli 20 kertaa tuomittu erilaisista omaisuus-, väärennys- ja liikennejuopumusrikoksista).

Lainvoimainen