Jugement Kantonsgericht (VD - Entscheid/2020/366)

Canton:	VD
Case number:	Entscheid/2020/366

Instance:	Kantonsgericht
Department:	Chambre des recours pénale

Kantonsgericht Entscheid Entscheid/2020/366 vom 11.05.2020 (VD)

Date:	11.05.2020
Force of law:	-

Summary:	W.________ was remanded in custody by the Tribunal des mesures de contrainte on April 30, 2020, because he was suspected of fraud and forgery of documents. W.________ appealed against this decision to the Federal Court. The Federal Court overturned the decision of the tribunal and ordered the release of W.________. The Federal Court justified its decision by the fact that the conditions for pre-trial detention did not exist. The Federal Court found that W.________ did not pose a risk of escape or obscuration and that the pre-trial detention was disproportionate. More detailed summary: W.________ was charged with fraud and forgery of documents by the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Zurich on July 4, 2017. On 30 April 2020, he was remanded in custody by the Tribunal des mesures de contrainte. W.________ appealed against this decision to the Federal Court. He argued that the conditions for pre-trial detention did not exist. He had not fled, nor had he destroyed any evidence. The pre-trial detention was therefore disproportionate. The Federal Court rejected the appeal of W.________ well. It overturned the tribunal's decision and ordered the release of W.________. The Federal Court justified its decision by the fact that the conditions for pre-trial detention did not exist. W.________ did not pose a danger of escape or darkening. He is a Swiss citizen and has a permanent residence in the canton of Zurich. He also has no criminal record. The Federal Court also found that the pre-trial detention was disproportionate. W.________ had only been suspected of fraud and forgery of documents. These offences are not of a serious nature. The pre-trial detention could therefore only have been considered if W.________ had presented a risk of escape or obscuration. The decision of the Federal Court is an important precedent. It shows that pre-trial detention is permissible only in strictly limited cases.
Rule of Law:	Art. 100 LTF;Art. 135 CPP;Art. 212 CPP;Art. 221 CPP;Art. 237 CPP;Art. 385 CPP;Art. 390 CPP;Art. 396 CPP;Art. 422 CPP;Art. 428 CPP;
BGE reference::	-
Comment:

Please note that there is no claim to topicality/accuracy/format and/or completeness and that therefore any guarantee is excluded. Original decisions may be ordered or made on the basis of the competent court.

Click here to return to the page search engine.