II Ka 383/13
AI generated
Court amended drunk driving verdict to clarify 'road use' description under procedural error rules.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Court of Appeal amended the first-instance verdict to correct a procedural error regarding the description of the defendant's actions. The prosecution argued that the lower court failed to explicitly state the motorbike was used on a road, violating procedural requirements. The court ruled that while the facts showed road use, the specific legal phrasing was missing, necessitating a change to ensure clarity.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 413 § 2 pkt 1 k.p.k.; Art. 437 § 1, § 2 k.p.k.; The court must amend a verdict if the description of the act omits essential elements required by law, even if the facts are clear, to ensure the judgment meets statutory standards.
Keywords
AI generated
drunk driving
procedural error
description of act
road use
motorcycle
criminal appeal
sentencing description
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 413 § 2 pkt 1 k.p.k.
Art. 437 § 1 k.p.k.
Art. 437 § 2 k.p.k.
Art. 438 pkt 2 k.p.k.
Art. 624 § 1 k.p.k.
Art. 627 k.p.k.
Art. 634 k.p.k.
art. 438 pkt 2 k.p.k
art. 624 § 1 k.p.k
art. 634 k.p.k