IV Ka 854/13
AI generated
Appeal dismissed; court upheld intentional indecent exposure conviction against defendant's negligence argument.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe appellate court dismissed the appeal and upheld the first-instance conviction for indecent exposure against the defendant. The defense argued the act was unintentional, claiming the defendant merely sought fresh air while unaware of being observed. The court rejected this, ruling that standing naked in the doorway of a building accessible to passersby constituted intentional conduct with public exposure.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 140 k.w.; Art. 6 § 2 k.w.: An act of exposing one's body in a location accessible to the public is intentional if the actor knowingly places themselves in such a situation, regardless of whether they were aware of specific observers.
Keywords
AI generated
intentional indecent exposure
public place definition
negligence defense rejection
appellate review standard
art 140 criminal code
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 140 k.w.
Art. 6 § 2 k.w.
Art. 624 § 1 k.p.k.
Art. 634 k.p.k.
Art. 119 kpow
§ 14 ust. 2 pkt 4 rozporządzenia Ministra Sprawiedliwości z dnia 28 września 2002r.
art. 624§1 k.p.k
art. 634 k.p.k
Cited Case Law
AI generatedII KR 355/74 OSNPG 1975/9/84
I KR 197/74 OSNKW 1975/5/58
II Akr 1/92 OSA 1992/6/41
II Akr 134/92 OSA 1992/11/55
II AKa 138/00 Prok. i Pr. 2002/1/28