Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 1907/2016 Generato dall'IA

Supreme Court allows retrial for hunting offense where police authorized killing injured animal.

Numero d'incarto KKO 1907/2016
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Finlandia (FI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Parzialmente accolto (Partially Allowed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Court granted a retrial request based on a new fact regarding the police authorization to kill an injured animal. The lower court had dismissed the appeal, holding that the case involved hunting rather than authorized animal termination. The court ruled that the appellate court failed to consider the police authorization as a material fact distinguishing the nature of the act.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

25 a luku 11 §: A retrial must be granted when new facts emerge that could alter the outcome of the proceedings, such as police authorization for terminating an injured animal instead of hunting.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
hunting offense police authorization injured animal termination retrial request new facts appellate procedure criminal liability difetto di motivazione

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
25 a luku 11 §
Generato dall'IA
appeal_1971_vaasa__284
Hunting a reindeer on a pasture is not hunting; shooting a domestic reindeer is not a crime.
appeal_1986_rovaniemi__617
Hunting offense dismissed for hunting dog; penalty upheld for driving motorbike with hunting gear off-road.
kko-precedent_2016_95
Supreme Court dismisses gross poaching charge; defendants took no conscious risk of bear attack.
kko-other_2019_1430
Supreme Court allows parole application where fraud conviction does not preclude release due to changed circumstances.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2021:30
Supreme Court orders retrial for hunting case where defendant requested personal hearing on serious negligence charge.

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

Käräjäoikeus oli tuominnut H:n metsästysrikoksesta 40 päiväsakkoon ja määrännyt hänet kolmen vuoden pituiseen metsästyskieltoon. H oli kiistänyt syytteen, koska kysymys ei ollut pyyntitarkoituksessa tapahtuneesta jäljittämisestä ja metsästyksestä, vaan poliisin luvalla suurriistavirka-aputoimijana toimeenpannusta loukkaantuneen eläimen lopettamisesta. Hovioikeus ei ollut myöntänyt H:lle jatkokäsittelylupaa.

Korkeimman oikeuden päätöksestä ilmenevillä perusteilla katsottiin, että hovioikeuden olisi tullut myöntää jatkokäsittelylupa tarkistusperusteella.

OK 25 a luku 11 §