Appellant Fails to Meet Deposit Requirements in Criminal Appeal
France (FR)
Synthèse Legislator
Généré par l'IAThe party appealing a decision by the Chamber of Accusation of the Court of Appeal of Lyon, which had deemed inadmissible an appeal against a refusal by the investigating judge to issue a committal order for an accused individual charged with breach of trust and forgery, had their appeal dismissed because they failed to provide the legally required deposit, as the documentation presented by the appellant, intended to prove indigence as a substitute for the required fine deposit, did not strictly conform to the requirements of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which mandates certification from the mayor or police commissioner based on their personal knowledge of the appellant's inability to pay.
Regeste Legislator
Généré par l'IAARTICLES 580 ET 581 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE PENALE; Appellant Fails to Meet Deposit Requirements in Criminal Appeal: The party appealing a decision by the Chamber of Accusation of the Court of Appeal of Lyon, which had deemed inadmissible an appeal against a refusal by the investigating judge to issue a committal order for an accused individual charged with breach of trust and forgery, had their appeal dismissed because they failed to provide the legally required deposit, as the documentation presented by the appellant, intended to prove indigence as a substitute for the required fine deposit, did not strictly conform to the requirements of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which mandates certification from the mayor or police commissioner based on their personal knowledge of the appellant's inability to pay.
Mots-clés
Généré par l'IADispositions légales citées
Généré par l'IADécisions connexes
Généré par l'IAQuestions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator
Généré par l'IACited as the basis for the decision to declare the appeal forfeited due to the failure to provide justification for the required deposit.
Texte complet
DECHEANCE DU POURVOI DE X... (LOUIS), PARTIE CIVILE, CONTRE UN ARRET DE LA CHAMBRE D'ACCUSATION DE LA COUR D'APPEL DE LYON, EN DATE DU 24 MARS 1964, QUI A DECLARE IRRECEVABLE SON APPEL CONTRE UNE ORDONNANCE DU JUGE D'INSTRUCTION DE ROANNE REFUSANT DE PLACER SOUS MANDAT DE DEPOT LE SIEUR Y... (GEORGES), INCULPE D'ABUS DE CONFIANCE, FAUX ET USAGE DE FAUX LA COUR, VU LE MEMOIRE PRODUIT;
VU LES ARTICLES 580 ET 581 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE PENALE;
ATTENDU QUE LE DEMANDEUR NE JUSTIFIE PAS DE LA CONSIGNATION DE L'AMENDE PREVUE PAR LA LOI;
QUE, POUR Y SUPPLEER, IL PRODUIT, OUTRE UN CERTIFICAT DE NON-IMPOSITION, UN DOCUMENT DELIVRE PAR LE MAIRE DE LA VILLE DE SAINT-ETIENNE CERTIFIANT QUE LE SUSNOMME "NE JOUIT D'AUCUN SALAIRE OU RESSOURCE QUI SOIT CONTROLABLE";
MAIS ATTENDU QU'UN TEL DOCUMENT NE SATISFAIT PAS AUX PRESCRIPTIONS DE L'ARTICLE 581 PRECITE QUI EXIGE QUE LE MAIRE DE LA COMMUNE DU DOMICILE DU DEMANDEUR, OU LE COMMISSAIRE DE POLICE, CERTIFIE QU'IL EST A SA CONNAISSANCE PERSONNELLE QUE L'INTERESSE SE TROUVE, A RAISON DE SON INDIGENCE, DANS L'IMPOSSIBILITE DE CONSIGNER L'AMENDE;
PAR CES MOTIFS, DECLARE X... DECHU DE SON POURVOI PRESIDENT : M ZAMBEAUX - RAPPORTEUR : M LEGRIS - AVOCAT GENERAL : M TOUREN