Magazine Státní zastupitelství 6/2016
- Towards the Procedure of the Appeal Court under Section 254, Paragraph 2, Criminal Procedure Code, or the Context allowing a Broader Review of a Contested Judgment (Ivo Kouřil)
- The Possibility of Assistance through Omission (Pavel Kučera)
- Prophylactic Treatment in Poland and the Czech Republic in Comparative Perspective (Adéla Rosůlek)
- Process Usability Test Result Reliability as Evidence in Criminal Proceedings (Kateřina Hlaváčová)
Annotation of Articles from Státní zastupitelství 6/2016
Towards the Procedure of the Appeal Court under Section 254, Paragraph 2, Criminal Procedure Code, or the Context allowing a Broader Review of a Contested Judgment
JUDr. Ivo Kouřil, soudce Nejvyššího soudu, e-mail: email@example.com
The article deals with the issue of the so-called wider review of a contested judgment by theCourt of Appeal, i.e. with the cases where a part of the judgement not contested by appeal isreviewed (or should have been reviewed) due to a content link of the defect challenged by theappellant and the follow-up separable statement (usually the part of the judgement concerningpunishment). Specifically, it highlights the difficulties that the application of Section 254, Paragraph 2, Criminal Procedure Code, may cause, mentioning also possible errors that canoccur regarding the proper determination of the extent of the review, or its reasoning in thedecision of the court of second instance. Following that, the article points out that the propersolving of the given question has also a significant impact on the appellant’s deciding to whatextent he may reasonably request the decision of the Court of Appeal to be reviewed by theSupreme Court.
JUDr. Pavel Kučera, státní zástupce Nejvyššího státního zastupitelství, e-mail: PKucera@nsz.brn.justice.cz
The author deal with the framework of the partial question concerning the relationship betweentwo major criminal laws, the omission. He specifically regards the answer to the question, whether it is possible to help the offender as well as through certain ‘mere’ omission thuswhether you can act omissive assistant.
JUDr. Adéla Rosůlek, dokorandka na katedře trestního práva PrFUk, právní čekatelka u Okresního státního zastupitelství v Pardubicích, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
This article summarizes Czech legal concept of protective treatment and security detention andcompares it with the Polish system of court-ordered obligatory protective treatment andtherapeutic departments in local prisons. As a conclusion is analysed several partial changes inthe applicable Czech legislation inspired by analyzed Polish system.
Mgr. Kateřina Hlaváčová, doktorandka na katedře trestního práva PrF MU v Brně, e-mail: email@example.com
This article deals with a narrowly defined issue of the procedural usability of a video and audiorecording obtained during a reliability check as evidence in a criminal proceeding. This article isbased on an analysis of relevant case law of the Constitutional Court and the European Court ofHuman Rights and answers the question whether it is possible to use a recording obtained bythe General Inspection of Security Forces as evidence in a criminal proceeding.