312.0
STPOCPP
CH
CH
Art. 46 Schweizerische Strafprozessordnung (StPO) - Direkter Geschäftsverkehr
StPO; 2. Titel: Strafbehörden; 4. Kapitel: Nationale Rechtshilfe
Art. 46 StPO · Direkter Geschäftsverkehr
Die Behörden verkehren direkt miteinander .
Gesuche um Rechtshilfe können in der Sprache der ersuchenden oder der ersuchten Behörde gestellt werden.
Besteht Unklarheit darüber, welche Behörde zuständig ist, so richtet die ersuchende Behörde das Rechtshilfegesuch an die oberste Staatsanwaltschaft des ersuchten Kantons oder des Bundes. Diese leitet es an die zuständige Stelle weiter.
Gerichtsentscheide zu dieser Bestimmung (41)
WBE.2024.309 · ag (§ 46 Abs. 1 lit. d EG StPO)
Inmate walk dispute: disciplinary action overturned
Legal basis for imposing disciplinary sanctions on inmates who culpably violate prison regulations or the execution plan.
P/1953/2024 · ge (art. 46 al. 1 CPP)
Appellant v. Police Court: Lawfulness of Stop and Illegal Stay Conviction
Mentioned in the reasoning regarding the decision on the revocation of suspended sentences.
Jug.2023.1 · vd (art. 40, 46 al. 1, 47, 49 al. 1, 51, 106 CPP)
Appeal of Rape and Impaired Driving Conviction Upheld; Complainant's Cross-Appeal on Damages Dismissed
Procedural articles cited in the preamble to the operative part, relating to the court's power and procedure, although not explicitly repeated in the final numbered orders, they underpin the court's general disposition.
STBER.2021.103 · so (Art. 46 Abs. 5 StPO)
Appellant v. State: Driving Without License and Credibility of Witness Testimony
Cited in the application section, although the order decided not to proceed due to time lapse (Art. 46 Abs. 5 StGB is referenced in the reasoning for non-application, but appears in the final application section).
STBER.2021.103 · so (Art. 46 StPO)
Appellant v. State: Driving Without License and Credibility of Witness Testimony
Procedural rule cited in the application section, likely related to criminal procedure management.
321----------- · vd (art. 46 al. 5 CPP)
Family Support Obligation Earning Capacity Appeal
Cited in the preamble to the operative part, regarding procedural rules or penalties.
STBER.2019.64 · so (Art. 46 StPO)
Appeal of Domestic Abuse Conviction and Sentence Modification
Cited in the final orders preamble, related to the overall procedure/decision framework.
Jug.2020.198 · vd (art. 34, 42, 46, 47, 49 al. 2 CPP)
State v. Appellant (Assault Conviction Appeal)
Procedural articles cited in the operative part related to the general powers of the appellate court in criminal matters.
STBER.2017.84 · so (Art. 46 Abs. 2 StPO)
Prosecutor v. Respondent: Sentencing Appeal for Narcotics and Navigation Law Violations
Cited in the introductory paragraph regarding the costs of the appeal procedure.
Jug.2019.181 · vd (art. 46 CPP)
Fraud Conviction Appeal and Sentence Modification
Cited in the preamble of the dispositive regarding procedural aspects, related to concurrent offenses.
SB180388 · zh (Art. 46 StPO)
Forgery Conviction Upheld for Unlawfully Obtaining Mobile Phone
This provision governs the admissibility of appeals/complaints and was cited in the reasoning concerning the scope of the appeal review.
STBER.2017.82 · so (Art. 46 Abs. 2 StPO)
Appeal Regarding Embezzlement and Fraud Convictions Upheld
Cited in the introductory clause, likely relating to procedural aspects of the sentence or costs, though the specific application is not clearly tied to the main substantive orders.
SB.2016.77 · bs (Art. 46 Abs. 2 StPO)
State v. Appellant (Battery Conviction Affirmation and Sentencing Modification)
Provision applied in the final orders to extend the probation period of the previously suspended sentence.
72.2016.200 · ti (art. 46 CPP)
State v. Drug Trafficking and Immigration Offenses
Cited in the preamble to the orders and applied in order 4 to revoke the conditional suspension of a previous sentence.
17.2016.154 · ti (art. 46 cpv. 2 CPP)
State v. [Appellant Name]: Battery Conviction Modification and Penalty Adjustment
Cited in the consideration section, but the dispositive explicitly states that the prolongation of the probation period is not applied in order 2.3, contradicting the lower court's decision which relied on this provision (Art. 46 cpv. 2 CP, which is referenced in the concluding legal citations).