A statement of the judgment and the fact of the case, including all the legal elements of the crime that the appellant has condemned, and his statement that it was established against him, as compelling evidence that leads to what he arranged for it. No shortcomings.
The law did not draw a special form for drafting the judgment. Referring to what leads to an understanding of the incident, its pillars and circumstances. No shortcomings.
(2) pleas “the plea that the case may not be considered due to the previous adjudication.” The ruling on “causing it is not defective.”
Expiry of the judgment for refusal to plead that the case may not be heard due to the previous adjudication of it, because the misdemeanors subject to the plea are not restricted against the accused, and no evidence of its finality has been submitted. True .
(3) Inferences. The trial court has “its authority to assess the seriousness of the investigations.” Refusal of the “reasons for appeal. What is not accepted from them.”
The court has the right to rely on the police investigations as they corroborate the evidence presented by it.
Dispute in the validity of the investigations. Objective controversy in estimating the evidence. It is not permissible in front of the veto .
(4) investment of funds. Reply . The penalty of “exemption”.
Enjoying the exemption stipulated in Article 21, second paragraph of Law No. 146 of 1988. Condition: The response must take place before a final judgment is issued in the case.
Exemption authority. objective. arguing about it. Unacceptable.
__________________
1- As the contested judgment indicated the fact of the case, including all the legal elements of the crime that the appellant had condemned, and provided evidence for its proof against him from the statements of the victims and the lawyer of the Capital Market Authority and the results of the investigations of the officer in the Anti- Public Funds Crimes Department, which are Justifiable and sufficient evidence to carry his judgment and that would lead to the order of the ruling on it. Since that was, and it was decided that the law did not draw a special form in which the judgment formulates the statement of the punishable incident and the circumstances in which it occurred, when the total of what the judgment stated - as is the casein the case at hand - is sufficient to understand the incident with its elements and circumstances as concluded by the court, This was in fulfillment of the rule of law, as the claim of deficiencies in causation has no place.
2- Since the judgment had ended in refusing to plead that the case may not be considered due to the previous ruling in misdemeanours, numbers... on the grounds that they are not bound against the accused, in addition to the failure to provide evidence of their finality. The appellant's defense in this regard, and then the appellant's denial in this regard is invalid.
3- It is decided that the court should rely in the formation of its creed on what came in the investigations of the police as it corroborates the evidence presented by it as long as it was assured of its seriousness, and since the judgment relied in convicting the appellant on the statements of the victims that were supported by the evidence of the investigations of the detective officer, as well as regarding the statements of the Capital Market Authority's lawyer, what the appellant raises about the incorrectness of the investigations is nothing more than a substantive argument in assessing the evidence and in the authority of the trial court to elicit its belief from it that may not be raised before the Court of Cassation.
4- Since the text of Article 21 in its second paragraph - of Law No. 146 of 1988 - states that the legislator has permitted the court to exempt the offender if the response takes place before a final judgment is issued in the case, the court's assessment of or not it implements its authority in the exemption is one of the releases of the trial court without commenting on it, the appellant's argument in this regard becomes unacceptable.
__________________
the facts
The Public Prosecution charged the appellant and others with:
1 - They received money from the public, amounting to.... to be employed and invested in the field of various commercial tenders, in return for a monthly return that varies from person to person without being licensed to engage in this activity as indicated in the investigations.
2. They refrained from refunding the funds subject to the previous accusation and due to the victims and which they received from them after implementing the provisions of Law 146 of 1988 regarding companies working in the field of receiving funds for investment as indicated in the investigations.
And referred him to a criminal court .... to punish him in accordance with the record and description contained in the referral order.
The aforementioned court ruled in his presence pursuant to Articles 1/1, 21/1, 2, 24 of Law No. 146 of 1988 with the implementation of the text of Articles 17 and 32 of the Penal Code, punishing him with imprisonment with hard labor for one year and a fine of one hundred thousand pounds for what is attributed to him. Suspension of the penalty of imprisonment and a fine imposed on him for a period of three years starting from the date of issuance of the judgment.
The convict appealed this ruling by way of cassation...etc.
__________________
court
As the appellant mourns the contested judgment that, if he convicted him of a crime, he received funds from the public to use and invest them in contravention of the provisions of the law, he was marred by shortcomings in causation, corruption in reasoning and error in the application of the law, because he did not indicate the incident that deserves punishment in a statement that fulfills the elements of the crime with which he condemned him Especially since the papers were devoid of evidence that he had received money from the victim, and he put forward his plea that the case may not be considered due to the previous adjudication of it in a way that does not justify his dismissal. Law No. 146 of 1988, all of this flaws the ruling and requires it to be set aside.
Whereas the contested judgment clarified the fact of the case, including all the legal elements of the crime that the appellant had condemned, and provided evidence for its proof against him from the statements of the victims and the lawyer of the Capital Market Authority and the results of the investigations of the officer in the Anti- Public Funds Crimes Department, which are evidence Justifiable and sufficient to carry his judgment, and it would lead to the order of the judgment. Since that was the case, and itwas decided that the law did not draw a special form in which the judgment formulates a statement of the punishable incident and the circumstances in which it occurred, so when the sum of what the judgment stated - as is the case in the case at hand - is sufficient in understanding the incident with its elements and circumstances as concluded by the court, it was This is in fulfillment of the rule of law, as the claim of shortcoming in causation has no place. what wasThat, and the judgment had ended in a refusal to plead that the case may not be considered due to the previous ruling in misdemeanours , numbers... on the grounds that they are not bound against the accused, in addition to the failure to provide evidence of their finality. The appellant’s plea in this regard, and then the appellant’s denunciation in this regard is incorrect. Since that was the case, and it was decided that the court had to rely in the formation of its creed on what came in the investigations of the police as it corroborated the evidence presented by it as long as it was assured of its seriousness, and since the judgment had relied in convicting the appellant on the statements of the victims that were supported by the evidence of the investigations The investigation officer, as well as the statements of the lawyer of the Capital Market Authority,What the appellant raises about the incorrectness of the investigations is nothing more than a substantive argument in assessing the evidence and in the authority of the trial court to elicit her belief from them, which may not be raised before the Court of Cassation. Since that was the case, and what was stated in Article 21 in its second paragraph that the legislator had permitted the court to exempt the offender if the response occurred before a final judgment was issued in the case, the court's assessment of whether or not it implements its authority in the exemption is one of the releases of the trial court without comment on it, and the appellant's argument becomes This particular is not acceptable.In view of the foregoing, the appeal in its entirety is without merit and must be rejected as a matter of fact.
__________________
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق