Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 4764/1996 AI generated

Supreme Court allows oral hearing request when trial facts are significantly different from defendant's prior statements.

Case Number KKO 4764/1996
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court of Finland allowed the defendant's request for an oral hearing in a domestic violence case. The lower court had convicted the defendant based on conflicting testimonies where the victim's personal statements held significant weight. The court ruled that the defendant's right to a fair trial necessitated a personal hearing given the material discrepancies in the evidence.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Käräjälain 10 §; Rangaistuslain 20 §: When a defendant requests an oral hearing and the trial facts are significantly different from their prior statements, the court must hold a personal hearing to ensure a fair trial.

Keywords

AI generated
oral hearing request domestic violence conviction conflicting testimonies fair trial rights Supreme Court of Finland

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Chapter 10 of the District Court Act
Section 20 of the Punishment Act
AI generated
kko-other_2009_2190
Supreme Court held lower court must transfer serious theft cases to main hearing for full review.
kko-other_2010_2388
Supreme Court held lower court must transfer serious theft cases to main hearing without delay.
kko-other_2009_1487
Supreme Court held lower court must provide main trial documents to defendant upon request.
kko-precedent_2007_10
Supreme Court quashes appeal court verdict for failing to hear victim personally in criminal trial.
kko-other_2008_2573
Supreme Court held lower court must transfer serious assault case to main hearing upon request.

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

Vastaaja oli käräjäoikeudessa tuomittu rangaistukseen väkisinmakaamisesta. Tuomion perustelujen mukaan käräjäoikeudessa henkilökohtaisesti kuultujen asianomistajan ja vastaajan toisistaan olennaisesti poikkeavien kertomusten uskottavuudella oli suuri merkitys näyttöä arvioitaessa. Kysymys hovioikeuden velvollisuudesta toimittaa suullinen käsittely ottaen myös huomioon, että vastaaja oli sitä pyytänyt.