Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
VSL sklep I Kp 1081/99 ECLI:SI:VSLJ:1999:I.KP.1081.99 AI generated

Appeal by assistant prosecutor dismissed as inadmissible after higher prosecutor withdrew the appeal.

Case Number VSL sklep I Kp 1081/99
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Slovenia (SI)
Decision Date
Outcome Dismissed
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The second-instance court dismissed the appeal filed by the assistant prosecutor against a first-instance judgment imposing conditional sentences for theft. Although the assistant prosecutor initially requested the court to replace conditional sentences with immediate imprisonment, the higher prosecutor subsequently withdrew the appeal. Consequently, the court ruled that the appeal was inadmissible under Article 390 of the Criminal Procedure Act due to the withdrawal.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Article 390 of the Criminal Procedure Act; An appeal withdrawn by the higher prosecutor renders the appeal inadmissible, resulting in its dismissal by the second-instance court.

Keywords

AI generated
Criminal Procedure Act inadmissible appeal prosecutor withdrawal conditional sentence second instance court

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Article 390 of the Criminal Procedure Act
AI generated
VSL Sodba VII Kp 9019/2019
Appeal court acquits defendant because first instance failed to prove joint criminality details for accessory liability.
VSC Sodba in sklep VII Kp 27251/2024
Court partially allows appeal, replacing prison sentence with court warning for defamation via SMS.
VSL Sodba in sklep VII Kp 47041/2015
Appeal court acquits defendants of tax evasion due to lack of criminal intent and statute of limitations. Defendants claimed right to refuse cooperation with tax authorities.
Sodba I Ips 92/2009
Supreme Court allows appeal against sentencing order for double-counting probation sentence in combined punishment.
VSL Sodba VII Kp 41273/2015
Appeal dismissed; court upheld conviction for obstructing official act by bankruptcy administrator due to threats.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Full text

Pritožba pomočnika okrožnega državnega tožilca se zavrže kot nedovoljena.

[JEDRO]

Državni tožilec se je pritožil zaradi odločbe o izrečenih kazenskih sankcijah in je predlagal, naj pritožbeno sodišče izpodbijano sodbo spremeni tako, da naj namesto pogojnih obsodb izreče zaporni kazni. Višji državni tožilec je pritožbo umaknil in je bila zato pritožba s sklepom zavržena kot nedovoljena.

[OBRAZLOŽITEV]

Okrajno sodišče v Ljubljani je z izpodbijano sodbo obdolžena MS in BK spoznalo za kriva, da sta storila kaznivo dejanje tatvine po 1. odst.

211. čl. KZ v zvezi s čl. 25 KZ. Izreklo jima je pogojni obsodbi in vsakemu določilo v okviru pogojne obsodbe kazen štiri mesece zapora s preizkusno dobo dveh let. Obema obdolžencema je še odvzelo premoženjsko korist, pridobljeno s kaznivim dejanjem. Odločilo je tudi o stroških kazenskega postopka.

Proti tej sodbi se je zaradi odločbe o kazenskih sankcijah pritožil pomočnik okrožnega državnega tožilca. Predlagal je, da naj pritožbeno sodišče pritožbi ugodi in obdolžencema namesto pogojne obsodbe izreče kazen zapora.

Po vpogledu obravnavane zadeve je višji državni tožilec z izjavo opr.

št. Ktp 541/99 z dne 1.10.1999 umaknil pritožbo pomočnika okrožnega državnega tožilca. Ker je torej prišlo do umika pritožbe, je sodišče druge stopnje po čl. 390 ZKP pritožbo pomočnika okrožnega državnega tožilca zavrglo kot nedovoljeno.