Key legal question
Whether the criminal appeal met the Federal Supreme Court's motivation requirements
Extracted holding
No. The filing merely invoked Art. 56(1)(b) CPP without showing why the judge's prior participation in another judgment affected impartiality or why the inadmissibility ruling violated the law.
Extracted reasoning
The Federal Supreme Court reviews only issues properly reasoned under Art. 42(2) LTF; fundamental-rights complaints require specific, precise argumentation under Art. 106(2) LTF. Those requirements were not met, so the appeal was inadmissible under Art. 108(1)(b) LTF.