Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
ATAS/538/2005 • CJ GE ATAS/538/2005 Généré par l'IA

Appellant v. State: Refusal of Duress Instruction Upheld

Numéro de cause ATAS/538/2005
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Suisse · Canton de Genève (CH-GE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Admis (Allowed)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The appellant, having been convicted for criminal offenses including drug distribution, challenged the trial court's refusal to grant a requested jury instruction regarding the defense of duress, arguing that the evidence presented supported a finding that a co-defendant coerced their participation through threats of violence against the appellant and their family. The court reasoned that while some testimony suggested pressure, the evidence did not meet the stringent legal threshold required to warrant a specific duress instruction, as the appellant failed to demonstrate a continuous threat leaving no reasonable opportunity to escape the coercive influence, and therefore affirmed the conviction, finding the refusal to instruct was not an abuse of discretion given the factual record.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Art. 66 al. 1 LTF; Appellant v. State: Refusal of Duress Instruction Upheld: The court reasoned that while some testimony suggested pressure, the evidence did not meet the stringent legal threshold required to warrant a specific duress instruction, as the appellant failed to demonstrate a continuous threat leaving no reasonable opportunity to escape the coercive influence, and therefore affirmed the conviction, finding the refusal to instruct was not an abuse of discretion given the factual record.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
crainte fondée possession illicite de stupéfiants état requis casier judiciaire preuve de l'intention coupable ordonnance de renvoi

Dispositions légales citées

Généré par l'IA
Généré par l'IA

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
Art. 66 al. 1 LTF

This provision was used to regulate the distribution of court costs.

Vous souhaitez savoir comment cet arrêt s'applique à votre dossier ?

Analysez cette décision avec la législation fédérale, le droit cantonal, la doctrine et la jurisprudence subséquente dans Legislator AI.

Ouvrir dans Legislator →

Texte complet

               '()*')++, ',*-')++,

##

 # "   "  #  "

*.  /0  % 12 $% )++, 



% 3333333333    !" #     )  $%&'(( &)*((

) 

44   "  "5#   6" ( (* &+),-) ./01/11   12

       

        !"# $%&

   5/3.5  

 !  

")(#6666666666 *($7(&8 &8(9(&( 1,,:;

  /. <9( /440 877(  ) & 85(9(&(  =(5>  ?  *( *9* &  ;

&(()))( ()&2*/4408 )7(*&(();

)(&/1*/4408( < ))  &(() 7(  9)('8 *() ()&)  & ) ( &&)*  *&(%;

8(9(  @  ))    9 & A*  ) 8   )( & /<( /440  (&('  ($ &  '8( 8 (  (9 @  )9 %* & &)( '8())( 8&*(()&);

8)'(AA&&)9))(('8)9 &(() $( &)( @  (>;

#     

8 9  &  B 1  B    0: B 1  B   &  )( A9)(  8)A( () <&(((=? ($ )&)(  ( (' )     )   ()  (9 @  )( 7&  85(9(&(  = ?;

)* & ($& &>) $(;

( )8( (*))8&*(()&&(;

)8 B02B2&)(7& (A&&)( & )( = ? 8   )(&  &(()  ))( () )  ') 7)*<'8@89)(&)9(;

7) &>)&)  '( (A&9( )$< ;

  )  '( )$ (  A( &   &)(   *$)*  &  7(   &(('&%&)*& ( *C*)')&  )$<  )    '  D & > & )>  < (7(  = ! 114  0- )(&B/; 1,E,B21E)(&B/$?;

  8>&>)'8( (*))8&*(()&);





3-/23/440  523.5  

#  4 " # "   "  #  "

%

7/8   9  :   5& 12) ";<

  8 

1B )9$;

% 8

/B 8&* ;

2B &(()&877( )&85(9(&( &  &/.<9( 2*/440;

.B 9)(   @ 8  @ DA )  &( & &  )9 &(() $( &)( @  (>;

0B )&* 8  @ 9  )   ) & 0445 7B @ (  &  (( ()@7( &;

:B 7)*   ( &  '8 9  7)* ) )     C  &  &( & 24 <) &>  ) (7( ()  ( )& &  ($ 7& &  #DF(GD)7'( : :44.     )( %*(B  &(    C  ))AB  **)( &)( H ? (&(' % * '&(()) &()$ (( &&(()  '; $? %) ) ' *) (7 (  (* )9)( &*&     &((); ? )   (A  )  & )   B #(  **)(  ) (    )( *  * )   ? $?   ? (5&  ($7&&) * (>)'8( &9&(9$B**)(&)* ())*)+ & 9 '( )  <)(  (( '  &(()  '   89) & ' %&() = B12/14: 14E?B    A77(>H (& H     (!! I(# I 



3-/23/440  5.3.5   )()7)*& C  ) (7(% ((('8@877(7& &)(A77



3-/23/440