Legislator Giurisprudenza & Legislazione
DE FR IT EN
Analizza in Legislator
KKO 1238/2015 Generato dall'IA

Supreme Court allows retrial when new confession by another person materially affects the original theft case facts.

Numero d'incarto KKO 1238/2015
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 of Finland allowed the case to be retried after a new confession by a second individual was discovered. The original defendant had been convicted of serious theft and payment instrument fraud, but the new evidence suggested the second person committed the crimes. The court ruled that this new material fact necessitated a fresh examination of the evidence and the original verdict's validity.

Regesto Legislator

Generato dall'IA

s. 24 of the Code of Judicial Procedure; where new evidence obtained after the first-instance judgment materially affects the facts of the case, the case must be remitted for retrial to ensure a fair trial based on all available evidence.

Parole chiave

Generato dall'IA
new confession evidence retrial procedure material facts change fair trial rights remittal to lower court principio del ne bis in idem riapertura dell'istruttoria revisione in materia penale

Disposizioni normative citate

Generato dall'IA
s. 24 of the Code of Judicial Procedure
Generato dall'IA
kko-precedent_1996_133
Supreme Court dismisses appeal; remand for hearing absent owner was improper when only defendant sought review.
ECLI:FI:KKO:2025:2
Supreme Court allows partial amendment of drug charge when original conviction bars new trial on same conduct.
kko-other_1996_5006
Criminal penalty claim dismissed; case remitted for new investigation after witness information arrived post-judgment.
kko-other_2001_2529
Supreme Court allows retrial of murder charge due to new evidence challenging original conviction.
kko-precedent_2003_108
Supreme Court held defendant liable for costs despite acquittal due to post-trial lighter law application.

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 tuomittu rangaistukseen törkeästä varkaudesta ja maksuvälinepetoksesta. Hovioikeuden tuomion antamisen jälkeen toinen henkilö oli esitutkinnassa tunnustanut tehneensä rikokset. Uusi selvitys otettiin huomioon ja juttu palautettiin käräjäoikeuteen uudelleen käsiteltäväksi.