Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
1 BvR 2356/20 ECLI:DE:BVerfG:2021:rk20210111.1bvr235620 Generato dall'IA

Constitutional validity of police authority for district-specific speed controls under § 32 Abs. 6 SOG ND

Numero d'incarto 1 BvR 2356/20
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Germania (DE)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Inammissibile (Inadmissible)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Federal Constitutional Court declined to accept the constitutional complaint for decision, leaving the challenged lower-court proceedings in force without a reasoned opinion pursuant to § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG. The dispute concerned a challenge to the police's statutory authority to conduct district-specific speed controls under § 32 Abs. 6 of the North Rhine-Westphalia State Police Act (SOG ND nF), alleging that this specific policing measure violated fundamental rights. The decision serves as a procedural dismissal based on the non-acceptance criteria, confirming that the respondent state's enforcement of the administrative speed-control provision did not warrant further constitutional review at the chamber level.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG; Constitutional validity of police authority for district-specific speed controls under § 32 Abs. 6 SOG ND: 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG. The dispute concerned a challenge to the police's statutory authority to conduct district-specific speed controls under § 32 Abs. 6 of the North Rhine-Westphalia State Police Act (SOG ND nF), alleging that this specific policing measure violated fundamental rights. The decision serves as a procedural dismissal based on the non-acceptance criteria, confirming that the respondent state's enforcement of the administrative speed-control provision did not warrant further constitutional review at the chamber level.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
controllo di polizia perizia giuridica esecuzione diritti costituzionali specifici autorità amministrativa diritto legale

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG
Cited as the procedural basis for omitting a reasoned judgment and the decision's non-appealability.
Generato dall'IA
2 BvR 1949/18
Constitutional complaint against speed violation fine: failure to substantiate fair procedure and information access claims under §§ 23, 92 BVerfGG
2 BvR 759/10
Constadonal admissibility of covert speed-enforcement photography as basis for administrative fines: scope of § 100h StPO and informational self-determination
2 BvR 2213/20
Failure to substantiate constitutional complaint in speeding offense case due to missing procedural records and lack of engagement with case law standards
2 BvQ 86/20
Eilantrag in Klageerzwingungssache abgelehnt mangels subsumtionsfähiger Darlegung der Grundrechtsverletzung
1 BvR 2146/22
Insufficient substantiation of constitutional complaint challenging legislative omission of traffic speed limits as violation of climate protection mandate and fundamental rights

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Legislator

Generato dall'IA
§ 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG

Cited as the procedural basis for omitting a reasoned judgment and the decision's non-appealability.

Ti chiedi come si applica questa sentenza alla tua fattispecie?

Analizza questa decisione insieme alla legislazione federale e cantonale, ai commentari e alla giurisprudenza successiva in Legislator AI.

Apri in Legislator →

Testo completo

Kammerbeschluss ohne Begründung: Verfassungsbeschwerde in Bezug auf polizeiliche Befugnis zur abschnittsbezogenen Geschwindigkeitskontrolle gem § 32 Abs 6 SOG ND nF erfolglos

[TENOR]

Die Verfassungsbeschwerde wird nicht zur Entscheidung angenommen.

[GRUENDE]

Von einer Begründung wird nach § 93d Abs. 1 Satz 3 BVerfGG abgesehen.

Diese Entscheidung ist unanfechtbar.