II K 279/18
AI generated
Court acquits defendant of burglary but finds him guilty of theft, then dismisses theft charge due to statute of limitations.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe court acquitted the defendant of burglary due to insufficient evidence and the burden of proof remaining with the prosecution. While the defendant was found guilty of theft for selling stolen goods, the prosecution's case was dismissed because the statute of limitations for that offense had expired. Consequently, the defendant was acquitted of the more serious charge but the theft proceedings were terminated due to the passage of time.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 279 § 1 kk; Art. 122 § 1 kw; Art. 17 § 1 pkt 1 kpk; Art. 414 § 1 kpk; Art. 45 § 1 kw: Where evidence is insufficient to establish guilt for a crime, the accused is acquitted, but if a lesser offense is proven, the prosecution may be dismissed if the statute of limitations has expired.
Keywords
AI generated
insufficient evidence
statute of limitations
burden of proof
acquittal
dismissal of proceedings
theft
burglary
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 279 § 1 kk
Art. 122 § 1 kw
Art. 17 § 1 pkt 1 kpk
Art. 414 § 1 kpk
Art. 45 § 1 kw
Art. 5 § 1 pkt 4 kpw
Art. 632 pkt 2 kpk
art. 387 k.p.k
Cited Case Law
AI generatedIII KK 276/09
Related Decisions
AI generatedII K 320/15
Court convicted two men of theft and aiding in sale, imposing prison terms and ordering compensation.
II K 879/20
Court acquits defendant of burglary theft due to conflicting evidence regarding how items were obtained.
IV KK 377/20
Supreme Court dismissed cassation against criminal verdict for selective evidence evaluation and profit division errors.
V K 555/20
Court acquits defendant of burglary charges due to reasonable suspicion of theft by former employee.
VI K 70/14
Youth defendants convicted of theft and property damage received suspended prison sentences and civil compensation orders.