VI Ka 45/19
AI generated
Court dismisses prosecution for harassment charges due to expiration of limitation periods for criminal liability.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe District Court in Warsaw dismissed the prosecution against W.S. for two counts of malicious harassment under Article 107 of the Penal Code. The defense argued that the lower court erred in fact-finding and evidence evaluation regarding the victim's statements. The appellate court ruled that the prosecution was barred because the limitation period for criminal liability had expired for both alleged offenses by January 2019.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 45 § 1 k.w.; Art. 5 § 1 pkt 4 k.p.w.: When the limitation period for criminal liability expires, the prosecution is barred, necessitating the dismissal of the proceedings.
Keywords
AI generated
limitation period
criminal liability
malicious harassment
proceedings dismissal
expiration of time
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 45 § 1 k.w.
Art. 5 § 1 pkt 4 k.p.w.
Art. 104 § 1 pkt 7 k.p.w.
Art. 118 § 2 k.p.w.
art. 5 § 1 pkt 4 k.p
art. 4 k.p.k
art. 5 k.p.k
art. 7 k.p.k
art. 8 k.p
art. 104 § 1 pkt 7 k.p
Related Decisions
AI generatedIX Ka 241/23
został obwiniony o to, że w okresie od 15 września 2020r.
IX Ka 607/15
Appeal court quashes lower court verdict due to insufficient evidence regarding victim's phone display to police.
IX Ka 1214/14
Court acquits defendant of disturbing peace for loud conversations, ruling intent and social norms are required.
IX Ka 405/13
D. został obwiniony o to, że w dniu 04.07.2012 roku około godziny 23.50 w T. na ul. (...) a następnie K. używał słów nieprzyzwoitych w miejscu publicznym. W tym samym miejscu i czasie poprzez głośne krzyki i naśladowanie odgłosów zwierząt zakłócił spokój i spoczynek nocny
IV Ka 619/15
Court dismissed appeal against traffic fine for using mobile phone while driving, rejecting argument that hands-free mode exempts liability.