Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
KKO 684/2020 AI generated

Supreme Court granted retrial permission to defendant based on new evidence of exemption from military service.

Case Number KKO 684/2020
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Finland (FI)
Decision Date
Outcome Allowed / Granted
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The Supreme Court granted the defendant leave for a retrial after the Court of Appeal denied it based on escape charges. The defendant introduced new evidence, specifically a military decision exempting them from service obligations, which the Supreme Court considered. Consequently, the court decided to allow the retrial to ensure a fair trial with the newly discovered facts.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Laki rikosasioista 37. aart. 39; Laki rikosasioista 37. aart. 40: The Supreme Court may grant leave for a retrial when new evidence, such as a decision exempting a defendant from military service, is presented that could affect the outcome of the proceedings.

Keywords

AI generated
leave for retrial new evidence military service exemption escape charges Supreme Court review

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Laki rikosasioista 37. aart. 39
Laki rikosasioista 37. aart. 40
AI generated
kko-precedent_2013_39
Supreme Court grants retrial permission for new evidence challenging lower court's evidence assessment in assault case.
appeal_1981_kouvola__1128
Court of Appeal dismissed appeal; lower court erred in finding aggravated fraud without prosecutor's specific charge.
kko-other_2001_2529
Supreme Court allows retrial of murder charge due to new evidence challenging original conviction.
appeal_1984_eastern-finland__117
Appeal court upheld conviction despite prosecution requesting only procedural amendment of grounds without changing the verdict.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2024:42
Supreme Court allows travel ban during trial to prevent flight risk despite strong ties to Finland.

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

Hovioikeus ei ollut myöntänyt karkaamisesta syytetylle vastaajalle jatkokäsittelylupaa. Vastaaja vetosi Korkeimmassa oikeudessa uutena todisteena muun muassa puolustusvoimien tekemään päätökseen, jonka mukaan hänet on vapautettu asevelvollisuuslain mukaisesta palveluksesta. Korkein oikeus otti uudet todisteet huomioon ja myönsi vastaajalle jatkokäsittelyluvan tarkistusperusteella.