Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 1782/2004 AI generated

Supreme Court allows appeal against prosecution when defendant absent from preliminary hearing but present at main trial.

Case Number KKO 1782/2004
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court allowed the prosecution's appeal against a lower court decision dismissing the prosecution. The defendant was absent from the preliminary hearing but present at the main trial where the court imposed a suspended sentence. The court held that the defendant's presence at the main trial satisfied the requirement of personal hearing, rendering the absence from the preliminary hearing irrelevant to the conviction's validity.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Laki rikosasioista 37 a luku 1; Laki rikosasioista 37 a luku 2: The requirement of personal hearing applies to the main trial, not preliminary proceedings, provided the defendant is present at the final sentencing hearing.

Keywords

AI generated
criminal procedure personal hearing requirement preliminary hearing absence main trial presence suspended sentence validity defendant rights appeal against dismissal

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Laki rikosasioista 37 a luku 1
Laki rikosasioista 37 a luku 2
AI generated
appeal_1979_eastern-finland__1986
Court of Appeal reduced sentence to probation and added fine despite Supreme Court's prior conviction.
appeal_1979_eastern-finland__766
Court upheld conviction for aggravated assault, rejecting reformatio in peius request despite new evidence of life-threatening injury.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2022:55
Supreme Court allows appeal hearing without defendant if not physically detained despite arrest order.
kko-other_2011_1746
Supreme Court dismisses appeal regarding lower court's duty to transfer robbery case to main hearing.
kko-precedent_2003_11
Supreme Court allows community service instead of prison after confirming rehabilitation and suitability.

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 haki muutosta, kun syyte oli käräjäoikeudessa hylätty. Vastaaja jäi pois hovioikeuden pääkäsittelystä, johon hänet oli kutsuttu asian selvittämistä varten. Hovioikeus tuomitsi vastaajan yhden vuoden ehdolliseen vankeusrangaistukseen. Kysymys siitä, oliko hovioikeus voinut tuomita vastaajan vankeusrangaistukseen häntä henkilökohtaisesti kuulematta.