Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
85-92219 Généré par l'IA

Appellant Detention Challenge Upheld

Numéro de cause 85-92219
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction France (FR)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Rejeté (Dismissed)
Frais judiciaires à la charge du recourant
Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The appellant, charged with various serious offenses including drug and weapons violations, appealed an order from the Indictment Division of the Court of Appeal which mandated his provisional detention, overturning a prior decision for judicial supervision. The Court of Cassation rejected the appeal, reasoning that the Indictment Division was not required to hold a personal appearance for the accused when deciding on detention, as procedural rules for the investigating judge did not apply there, and the right to defense was safeguarded because the appellant's counsel had access to the file and the right to present observations at the hearing. Furthermore, the court found that the detention order was sufficiently motivated, citing the nature of the charges—including the discovery of weapons, explosives instructions, and drugs at the appellant's residence—and the necessity of detention to prevent pressure on accomplices while the investigation was ongoing.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

ARTICLE 145 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE PENALE, ARTICLE 144 DE CE CODE, ARTICLE 197 DUDIT CODE, ARTICLE 199 PRECITE, ARTICLE 137, ARTICLE 138; Appellant Detention Challenge Upheld: The Court of Cassation rejected the appeal, reasoning that the Indictment Division was not required to hold a personal appearance for the accused when deciding on detention, as procedural rules for the investigating judge did not apply there, and the right to defense was safeguarded because the appellant's counsel had access to the file and the right to present observations at the hearing. Furthermore, the court found that the detention order was sufficiently motivated, citing the nature of the charges—including the discovery of weapons, explosives instructions, and drugs at the appellant's residence—and the necessity of detention to prevent pressure on accomplices while the investigation was ongoing.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
motif de détention moyens de défense ordonnance de renvoi violation de garanties procédurales droit de séjour recours contre décision de renvoi

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
ARTICLE 145 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE PENALE
The court confirmed that the Chambers d'Accusation's decision was specifically motivated according to the elements of the case, as required by this article for detention orders.
ARTICLE 144 DE CE CODE
The court confirmed that the detention order was based on one of the cases exhaustively listed in this article.
ARTICLE 197 DUDIT CODE
Cited in the reasoning that the defense rights were not violated because the file was made available to the counsel.
ARTICLE 199 PRECITE
Cited in the reasoning regarding the defense counsel's right to present observations at the hearing.
ARTICLE 137
Cited in the grounds of the rejected first and second grounds of appeal.
ARTICLE 138
Cited in the grounds of the rejected third and fourth grounds of appeal.
ARTICLE 591
Cited in the grounds of the rejected first/second and third/fourth grounds of appeal.
ARTICLE 592
Cited in the grounds of the rejected first/second and third/fourth grounds of appeal.
Généré par l'IA
07-83617
Appellant's Challenge to Provisional Detention for Drug Offenses Upheld
05-83460
Appellant Detention Challenge Upheld on Procedural Grounds
12-87005
Detention Challenge Over Undated Requisitions Upheld
18-86665
Appellant's Detention Challenge Based on Lack of Timely Document Access Upheld
13-85714
Narcotics Offense Detention Appeal Upheld

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
ARTICLE 145 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE PENALE

The court confirmed that the Chambers d'Accusation's decision was specifically motivated according to the elements of the case, as required by this article for detention orders.

ARTICLE 144 DE CE CODE

The court confirmed that the detention order was based on one of the cases exhaustively listed in this article.

ARTICLE 197 DUDIT CODE

Cited in the reasoning that the defense rights were not violated because the file was made available to the counsel.

ARTICLE 199 PRECITE

Cited in the reasoning regarding the defense counsel's right to present observations at the hearing.

ARTICLE 137

Cited in the grounds of the rejected third and fourth grounds of appeal.

ARTICLE 138

Cited in the grounds of the rejected third and fourth grounds of appeal.

ARTICLE 591

Cited in the grounds of the rejected first/second and third/fourth grounds of appeal.

ARTICLE 592

Cited in the grounds of the rejected first/second and third/fourth grounds of appeal.

ARTICLE 593

Cited in the grounds of the rejected first/second and third/fourth grounds of appeal.

6-1 DE LA CONVENTION EUROPEENNE DE SAUVEGARDE DES DROITS DE L'HOMME

The court examined whether the procedure violated this article, finding no violation.

ARTICLE 137

Cited in the grounds of the rejected first and second grounds of appeal.

ARTICLE 144

Cited in the grounds of the rejected first and second grounds of appeal.

ARTICLE 145

Cited in the grounds of the rejected first and second grounds of appeal, but found inapplicable in the specific procedural context of the Chamber d'Accusation.

ARTICLE 144

Cited in the grounds of the rejected first and second grounds of appeal.

ARTICLE 145

Cited in the grounds of the rejected first and second grounds of appeal, but found inapplicable in the specific procedural context of the Chamber d'Accusation.

ARTICLE 138

Cited in the grounds of the rejected third and fourth grounds of appeal.

ARTICLE 66 al. 1 LTF

The applicant was condemned to pay the costs.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

STATUANT SUR LE POURVOI FORME PAR :

- X... FRED,

INCULPE D'INFRACTIONS A LA LEGISLATION SUR LES STUPEFIANTS ET A LA LEGISLATION SUR LES ARMES, VIOLENCES AVEC ARMES, VOLS AGGRAVES, VOLS ET RECEL DE VOLS,

CONTRE UN ARRET DE LA CHAMBRE D'ACCUSATION DE LA COUR D'APPEL DE BASSE-TERRE EN DATE DU 4 AVRIL 1985 QUI A ORDONNE SA MISE EN DETENTION PROVISOIRE ;

VU LE MEMOIRE PERSONNEL PRODUIT ;

SUR LES PREMIER ET DEUXIEME MOYENS DE CASSATION REUNIS ET PRIS DE LA VIOLATION DES ARTICLES 137, 144, 145, 591, 592 ET 593 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE PENALE ET 6-1 DE LA CONVENTION EUROPEENNE DE SAUVEGARDE DES DROITS DE L'HOMME ;

" EN CE QUE LA CHAMBRE D'ACCUSATION, QUI ENVISAGEAIT DE PLACER L'INCULPE EN DETENTION, A STATUE SANS LE FAIRE COMPARAITRE PERSONNELLEMENT " ;

ATTENDU QUE PAR L'ARRET ATTAQUE LA CHAMBRE D'ACCUSATION, INFIRMANT L'ORDONNANCE DU JUGE D'INSTRUCTION QUI AVAIT PLACE X... SOUS CONTROLE JUDICIAIRE, A, APRES AVOIR ENTENDU LES EXPLICATIONS DE SON CONSEIL QUI AVAIT AU PREALABLE DEPOSE UN MEMOIRE, ORDONNE LA MISE EN DETENTION DE L'INCULPE ET DELIVRE MANDAT DE DEPOT ;

ATTENDU QU'EN STATUANT AINSI LA CHAMBRE D'ACCUSATION N'A VIOLE AUCUN DES TEXTES VISES AUX MOYENS ;

ATTENDU, EN EFFET, D'UNE PART, QUE LA PROCEDURE PREVUE PAR LES ALINEAS 3, 4, 5, 6 ET 7 DE L'ARTICLE 145 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE PENALE N'EST PAS APPLICABLE DEVANT LA CHAMBRE D'ACCUSATION MAIS SEULEMENT DEVANT LE JUGE D'INSTRUCTION ;

QUE L'ARTICLE 199 DU MEME CODE NE PREVOIT LA COMPARUTION PERSONNELLE DES PARTIES QUE SI LA CHAMBRE D'ACCUSATION L'ESTIME UTILE ;

QU'UNE TELLE MESURE EST LAISSEE A L'ENTIERE DISCRETION DES JUGES ET NE SAURAIT LEUR ETRE IMPOSEE ;

ATTENDU, D'AUTRE PART, QUE LESDITES PRESCRIPTIONS NE SONT NULLEMENT CONTRAIRES A L'ARTICLE 6-1 DE LA CONVENTION EUROPEENNE DE SAUVEGARDE DES DROITS DE L'HOMME ET DES LIBERTES FONDAMENTALES, DES LORS QUE L'ARTICLE 197 DUDIT CODE EXIGE QU'EN MATIERE DE DETENTION, LE DOSSIER SOIT MIS A LA DISPOSITION DU CONSEIL DE L'INCULPE AU MOINS 48 HEURES AVANT L'AUDIENCE DONT LA DATE A ETE OBLIGATOIREMENT NOTIFIEE PRECEDEMMENT ET QUE CE CONSEIL NE PEUT, SELON L'ARTICLE 199 PRECITE, SE VOIR REFUSER LE DROIT DE PRESENTER DES OBSERVATIONS A L'AUDIENCE, LORSQU'IL EN FAIT LA DEMANDE ;

QU'AINSI EST INSTAURE UN VERITABLE DEBAT ET QUE LES DROITS DE LA DEFENSE NE SONT NULLEMENT MECONNUS ;

D'OU IL SUIT QUE LES MOYENS DOIVENT ETRE REJETES ;

SUR LES TROISIEME ET QUATRIEME MOYENS REUNIS ET PRIS DE LA VIOLATION DES ARTICLES 137, 138, 144, 145, 591, 592 ET 593 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE PENALE, MANQUE DE BASE LEGALE ET NON-REPONSE A CONCLUSIONS ;

ATTENDU QU'APRES AVOIR RELEVE LES CHARGES QUI PESAIENT SUR X..., AU DOMICILE DUQUEL AVAIENT ETE DECOUVERTS DES ARMES, UN TRACT DONNANT DES INSTRUCTIONS POUR LA FABRICATION D'ENGINS EXPLOSIFS, ET DES GRAINES DE CANNABIS AINSI QUE LE MATERIEL NECESSAIRE A LA CONSOMMATION DE CE STUPEFIANT, LA CHAMBRE D'ACCUSATION, POUR ORDONNER LA MISE DE L'INCULPE SOUS MANDAT DE DEPOT, ENONCE QUE " L'INFORMATION NE FAIT QUE DEBUTER ", QUE " L'ORIGINE DE LA DROGUE TROUVEE CHEZ L'INCULPE N'A PAS ETE DETERMINEE ", ET QUE " SON PLACEMENT EN DETENTION EST INDISPENSABLE POUR L'EMPECHER D'EXERCER DES PRESSIONS SUR SES COMPLICES " ;

ATTENDU QU'EN CET ETAT LA COUR DE CASSATION EST EN MESURE DE S'ASSURER QUE LA CHAMBRE D'ACCUSATION S'EST PRONONCEE PAR UNE DECISION SPECIALEMENT MOTIVEE D'APRES LES ELEMENTS DE L'ESPECE AINSI QUE L'EXIGE L'ARTICLE 145 DU CODE DE PROCEDURE PENALE ET POUR L'UN DES CAS LIMITATIVEMENT ENUMERES A L'ARTICLE 144 DE CE CODE ;

QU'AINSI CES MOYENS NE PEUVENT DAVANTAGE ETRE RETENUS ;

ET ATTENDU QUE L'ARRET EST REGULIER EN LA FORME ;

REJETTE LE POURVOI ; CONDAMNE LE DEMANDEUR AUX DEPENS.