Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
Helsingin HO 25.03.1986 425 AI generated

Court rejects appeal where currency smuggled with illicitly obtained funds is not subject to separate confiscation.

Case Number Helsingin HO 25.03.1986 425
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The court dismissed the appeal against a conviction for currency smuggling, ruling that the defendant could not be separately ordered to forfeit the smuggled currency. The defendant had been sentenced to forfeit the value of drugs sold in Finland under the Narcotics Act but argued for additional forfeiture of the currency. The court held that since the currency was acquired through the drug sale already subject to forfeiture, a separate confiscation order for the currency was legally unnecessary and redundant.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Narcotics Act s. 7; Currency Act s. 10: When currency is acquired through a crime already subject to forfeiture under the Narcotics Act, a separate confiscation order for that currency is not required.

Keywords

AI generated
currency smuggling forfeiture of proceeds Narcotics Act illicit funds separate confiscation order redundant penalty criminal forfeiture

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Narcotics Act s. 7
Currency Act s. 10
AI generated
kko-precedent_2015_74
Supreme Court dismisses drug dealer's fine for unpaid debt as not constituting illegal profit under criminal law.
kko-precedent_1989_97
Supreme Court limits confiscation to egg value only when smuggled eggs are not the car's main cargo.
appeal_1985_helsinki__1460
Court dismisses appeal against conviction for smuggling Finnish marks obtained by fraud and violating currency regulations.
kko-precedent_1995_8
Supreme Court voids old fines for wrong person but dismisses newer ones due to statute of limitations.
insurance_2007_4976-2006
Court allows criminal damage compensation when victim's personal vulnerability contributed to the loss.

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

Ulkomailla asuva syytetty oli vienyt maasta valuuttaa alle 10.000 markan arvosta. Valuutta oli hankittu Suomessa huumausaineen myynnillä. Syytetty tuomittiin rangaistukseen valuutan salakuljetuksesta, koska valuutta oli rikoksella hankittu.

Syytetty oli huumausainelain 7 §:n nojalla tuomittu menettämään myytyjen huumausaineiden arvo ja hyöty valtiolle. Syytettyä ei tuomittu menettämään valtiolle huumausaineiden arvon ja hyödyn lisäksi valuutan arvoa.

Läsnä: Hiltunen, Haltia ja Lahti Esittelijä: Antila

KKO:n ratkaisu: Ei valituslupaa Päätös n:o 2103/25.6.1986