Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO VL:2025-21 Generato dall'IA

Supreme Court allows appeal on whether negligent shooting causing death constitutes intentional homicide.

Numero d'incarto KKO VL:2025-21
Autorità giudiziaria
Giurisdizione Finlandia (FI)
Data della decisione
Esito del giudizio Accolto (Allowed)
Apri la fonte ufficiale Versione Markdown leggibile dalle macchine (.md)

Sintesi Legislator

Generato dall'IA

The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal regarding whether the defendant's negligent shooting, which killed a third party, constituted the crime of intentional homicide. The lower court convicted the defendant of attempted murder based on the intent to shoot the intended victim. The court decided to allow the appeal to determine if the specific circumstances of the mistaken identity and negligence negate the requisite intent for homicide.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

Korkein oikeus on myöntänyt valituslupaa kysymykseksi, onko virheellisesti tapahtunut kuolema syyllistynyt tappoon; onko virheellisesti tapahtunut kuolema syyllistynyt tappoon.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
intentional homicide negligent shooting mistaken identity criminal intent attempted murder leave to appeal corpus delicti principio del ne bis in idem
Generato dall'IA
kko-precedent_1996_134
Supreme Court remands case for oral hearing due to conflicting testimonies and defendant's right to defense.
kko-other_2005_2255
Supreme Court dismissed appeal for late submission of criminal case due to procedural violation of time limits.
appeal_1979_eastern-finland__1986
Court of Appeal reduced sentence to probation and added fine despite Supreme Court's prior conviction.
kko-precedent_1995_79
Supreme Court dismisses appeal where lower court relied on new evidence without requesting defendant's response.
kko-other_2022_365
Supreme Court dismisses appeal regarding legal costs for granting further stay of execution permission.

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

A oli ampunut pistoolilla laukauksen tarkoituksenaan osua B:hen, mutta laukaus oli

osunut C:hen, joka oli kuollut. Hovioikeus tuomitsi A:n rangaistukseen taposta.

Kysymys siitä, onko A syyllistynyt menettelyllään tappoon.

Valituslupakortti sisältää kuvauksen siitä kysymyksestä, johon liittyen asiassa on

myönnetty valituslupa. Sen sisältö ei sido korkeinta oikeutta eikä rajoita asian

käsittelyä siltä osin kuin valituslupa on myönnetty.