II Ka 533/23
AI generated
Court partially allows appeal on sentencing disproportion but dismisses appeal on legal qualification, keeping sentence intact.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe court upheld the conviction and sentence while dismissing the appeal regarding the legal qualification of the crime. The defendant argued for a lighter sentence due to disproportion, but the court found no such error. Consequently, the appeal on sentencing was rejected, though the state covered defense costs due to the defendant's imprisonment.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 438 pkt 4 k.p.k.; Art. 624 § 1 k.p.k. w zw. z art. 634 k.p.k.: The court rejects an appeal claiming excessive punishment if the sentence is not grossly disproportionate, but may exempt the imprisoned defendant from procedural costs.
Keywords
AI generated
excessive punishment
legal qualification
criminal appeal
procedural costs
imprisonment exemption
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 438 pkt 4 k.p.k.
Art. 624 § 1 k.p.k.
Art. 634 k.p.k.
Art. 636 § 1 k.p.k.
Art. 29 ust. 2 Prawo o adwokaturze
§ 17 ust. 5 w zw. z § 4 ust. 3 rozporządzenia Ministra Sprawiedliwości z dnia 3 października 2016 r.
art. 438 pkt 1 k.p.k
art. 438 pkt 2 k.p.k
art. 438 pkt 3 k.p.k
art. 438 pkt 4 k.p.k
Cited Case Law
AI generatedRelated Decisions
AI generatedII AKa 34/21
Appeal dismissed; defense failed to prove factual errors, but prosecutor's claim of excessive sentence led to increased penalties.
II Ka 665/22
Criminal appeal dismissed; defense failed to prove procedural errors or excessive sentencing under Polish Criminal Procedure Code.
II Ka 854/22
Criminal appeal dismissed for disproportionate penalty; prosecutor's appeal on excessive ban upheld by regional court.
II Ka 37/20
Criminal appeal dismissed; court upheld conviction and sentence due to lack of procedural errors affecting the verdict.
II Ka 887/19
Court dismisses appeal on procedural grounds, upholding first-instance conviction for attempted theft.