Lo spazio di lavoro basato sull'IA per i professionisti del settore legale

  • Ricerca giuridica con accesso a oltre 1 milione di fonti
  • Automazione dei documenti
  • Gestione delle pratiche
  • Ospitato nell'UE e in Svizzera

Prova gratis per 14 giorni (10 domande/giorno durante la prova)

Prova gratisVedi una demo

Lack of standing and insufficient reasoning on criminal complaint

6B_293/2008Tribunale federale / Divisione penale16 mag 2008Dismissed

Apri la fonte

Estratto da Omnilex

Sintesi Omnilex

The appellant challenged a cantonal non-entry decision concerning a criminal complaint against two officials for fraud and abuse of authority. The Federal Supreme Court held that he lacked standing and that his filing consisted only of inadmissible appellatory criticism, failing to meet the reasoning requirements of Art. 106(2) BGG. The president therefore did not enter on the complaint under Art. 108 BGG. The request for free legal aid was refused because the appeal had no chance of success, and court costs of CHF 800 were imposed on the appellant.

Massima Omnilex

Art. 108 BGG, Art. 106 Abs. 2 BGG; standing and reasoning requirements in summary non-entry proceedings. A complaint may be declared inadmissible without a merits review where the appellant lacks procedural standing and the submissions amount merely to appellatory criticism. The Federal Supreme Court may refuse to enter on the matter in the simplified procedure if the reasoning requirements are not met. Legal aid under Art. 64 BGG is excluded when the appeal is manifestly hopeless. Court costs are ordinarily imposed on the unsuccessful party; a reduction under Art. 65 Abs. 2 BGG requires circumstances not present where the party's litigation conduct does not justify relief.

Testo completo

{T 0/2}
6B_293/2008 /hum

Urteil vom 16. Mai 2008
Strafrechtliche Abteilung

Besetzung
Bundesrichter Schneider, Präsident,
Gerichtsschreiber Monn.

Parteien
X.________,
Beschwerdeführer,

gegen

Generalprokurator des Kantons Bern, Hochschulstrasse 17, 3012 Bern,
Beschwerdegegner.

Gegenstand
Nichteintretensbeschluss (Betrug, Amtsmissbrauch),

Beschwerde gegen den Beschluss des Obergerichts des Kantons Bern, Anklagekammer, vom 20. März 2008.

Der Präsident zieht in Erwägung:

1.
Die Beschwerde richtet sich dagegen, dass auf eine Strafanzeige gegen zwei Amtspersonen wegen Betrugs und Amtsmissbrauchs nicht eingetreten wurde. Wie der Beschwerdeführer aus früheren Urteilen weiss, ist er zur vorliegenden Beschwerde, die sich überdies auf unzulässige appellatorische Kritik beschränkt und deshalb den Begründungsanforderungen von Art. 106 Abs. 2 BGG nicht genügt, nicht legitimiert (Urteile 6B_216_2007 vom 12. Juni 2007, 6B_407/2007 vom 16. August 2007 und 6B_758/2007 vom 4. Dezember 2007). Darauf ist im Verfahren nach Art. 108 BGG nicht einzutreten.

2.
Die Gerichtskosten sind dem Beschwerdeführer aufzuerlegen (Art. 66 Abs. 1 BGG). Das Gesuch um unentgeltliche Rechtspflege ist in Anwendung von Art. 64 BGG abzuweisen, weil die Rechtsbegehren aussichtslos erschienen. Eine Reduktion der Gerichtsgebühr kommt schon wegen der Art der Prozessführung des Beschwerdeführers nicht in Betracht (Art. 65 Abs. 2 BGG).

Demnach erkennt der Präsident:

1.
Auf die Beschwerde wird nicht eingetreten.

2.
Das Gesuch um unentgeltliche Rechtspflege wird abgewiesen.

3.
Die Gerichtskosten von Fr. 800.-- werden dem Beschwerdeführer auferlegt.

4.
Dieses Urteil wird den Parteien und dem Obergericht des Kantons Bern, Anklagekammer, schriftlich mitgeteilt.
Lausanne, 16. Mai 2008
Im Namen der Strafrechtlichen Abteilung
des Schweizerischen Bundesgerichts
Der Präsident: Der Gerichtsschreiber:

Schneider Monn

Parole chiave

standingreasoning requirementsnon-entrycriminal complaintlegal aidcourt costsappellatory criticism

Estratto da Omnilex

Questioni giuridiche chiave estratte da Omnilex

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether the appellant had standing to bring the criminal complaint appeal and complied with the reasoning requirements.

Decisione estratta

He was not entitled to appeal and his filing consisted only of inadmissible appellatory criticism; the complaint did not satisfy Art. 106(2) BGG.

Motivazione estratta

The court referred to earlier judgments involving the same appellant and held that he lacked standing. The appeal was also insufficiently reasoned, so the court could not examine it on the merits.

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether the Federal Supreme Court should enter on the complaint under the summary procedure of Art. 108 BGG.

Decisione estratta

No; the complaint was not admissible and therefore could not be examined in that procedure.

Motivazione estratta

Because the appeal was manifestly inadmissible for lack of standing and insufficient reasoning, the president declined to enter on it under Art. 108 BGG.

Questione giuridica chiave

Whether legal aid should be granted.

Decisione estratta

No; the request was rejected because the appeal had no prospect of success.

Motivazione estratta

Under Art. 64 BGG, legal aid is unavailable when the requested remedies are hopeless.

Questione giuridica chiave

How court costs should be allocated.

Decisione estratta

The court costs were imposed on the appellant, with no reduction granted.

Motivazione estratta

As the appellant's procedural conduct did not justify a reduction, the full fee was charged to him under Art. 66(1) and Art. 65(2) BGG.

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.