According to a court of law at Munich District Court, a criminal sentenced in March 2016 to more than eight years' imprisonment may leave prison. The trial for attempted manslaughter against Erkan G., who had stabbed three men in a bar, has to be repeated, reports "tz". Until n, 30-year-old was at liberty.
"The arrest warrant was put out of action," paper quoted a lawyer. Previously, Federal Court of Justice (BGH) had lifted verdict against stabs.
The reason for this is a formal defect of court: According to court, re was no valid business distribution plan in 2012, 2014 and first quarter of 2015 in First Court of Jury of District Court, which also dealt with trial against Erkan G.
nThe judge pulled process despite reprimand by n
It defines which judge is responsible for which cases. This is to prevent an arbitrary occupation of criminal proceedings. In Chamber, however, according to "tz", it was obvious that business distribution was to be determined verbally. Out of habit, because judges have had same responsibilities for years.
However, BGH calls for a "constitutionally required written form" for business distribution plan. This was "accidentally omitted", according to BGH and tipped verdict against Erkan G.
The attorney Adam Ahmed had formal defect already at beginning of process in September 2015. The responsible judge, however, did not let process burst. After verdict defender went into revision. With success.
nFurr offenders could follow example n
The BGH has referred case back to regional court. There, Erkan G. is to be tried again in winter at Second Criminal Court.
The case could draw wide circles. At least oretically: If or offenders, who were also convicted by Chamber during period in question, challenge ir judgment. To do so, y would have to try a re-entry procedure. However, hurdles for this are high.