Legislator Jurisprudence & Législation
DE FR IT EN
Analyser dans Legislator
2 BvR 130/24 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2024:rk20240305.2bvr013024 Généré par l'IA

Constitutional complaint in criminal matter rejected for failure to meet substantiation requirements under §§ 23, 92 BVerfGG

Numéro de cause 2 BvR 130/24
Autorité / Tribunal
Juridiction Allemagne (DE)
Date de la décision
Issue du litige Irrecevable (Inadmissible)
Ouvrir la source officielle Version Markdown lisible par machine (.md)

Synthèse Legislator

Généré par l'IA

The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany declined to admit the constitutional complaint to the merits, ruling it manifestly inadmissible without needing to address the accompanying request for reinstatement of the previous period. The case involved a criminal matter where the complainant attempted to challenge a lower court’s decision. The court held that the submission failed to meet the mandatory requirements for reasoned substantiation under § 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 Halbsatz 1 and § 92 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), as the arguments lacked sufficient specific legal reasoning and factual detail required for admissibility.

Regeste Legislator

Généré par l'IA

Constitutional complaint in criminal matter rejected for failure to meet substantiation requirements under §§ 23, 92 BVerfGG: The case involved a criminal matter where the complainant attempted to challenge a lower court’s decision. The court held that the submission failed to meet the mandatory requirements for reasoned substantiation under § 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 Halbsatz 1 and § 92 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act (BVerfGG), as the arguments lacked sufficient specific legal reasoning and factual detail required for admissibility.

Mots-clés

Généré par l'IA
motivation insuffisante des griefs constitutionnels dénonciation pénale examen sur le fond argumentation motivée défaut de preuve constitutionnalité des lois
Généré par l'IA
1 BvR 628/23
Constitutional complaint rejected for insufficient substantiation: failure to apply established fundamental rights standards to specific facts
2 BvR 2230/21
Insufficiently reasoned constitutional complaint: failure to substantiate violation of constitutional rights under §§ 23 Abs. 1 S. 2, 92 BVerfGG
1 BvR 1472/11
Constitutional complaint rejected for lack of sufficient substantiation
1 BvR 963/16
Constitutional complaint rejected for failure to substantiate fundamental rights violation
2 BvR 2211/22
Constitutional Complaint Rejected for Lack of Substantiation and Warning of Misuse Fee

Questions juridiques clés extraites par Legislator

Généré par l'IA
§ 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 Halbsatz 1, § 92 Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetz

Cited in the dispositive as the basis for declaring the constitutional complaint manifestly inadmissible due to failure to meet substantiation requirements.

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

Nichtannahme einer offensichtlich unzulässigen Verfassungsbeschwerde in einer Strafsache - Verfehlung der Begründungs- und Substantiierungsanforderungen - Tenorbegründung

[TENOR]

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen, ohne dass es auf den Antrag auf Wiedereinsetzung in den vorigen Stand ankommt. Sie genügt den Darlegungs- und Substantiierungserfordernissen der § 23 Abs. 1 Satz 2 Halbsatz 1, § 92 Bundesverfassungsgerichtsgesetz offensichtlich nicht.

[GRUENDE]

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.