The website www.at.gov.lv uses only technically necessary cookies that ensure the operation and functionality of the website More information
19.07.2005. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases of the Senate, case No SKK-404/2005
Nepilnības apelācijas instances tiesas sēdes protokolā
18.03.2003. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-137/2003
If a defendant, having gotten acquainted with the minutes of a court session, has not taken notes of the minutes, there is no reason to recognize a violation of Sections 87 and 88 of the Latvian Criminal Procedure Code
10.01.2003. Assignment Hearing Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-31/2003
Court costs are charged from the state's account if a defendant is acquitted, if a criminal case is terminated, as well as in case of insolvency of a person from whom the costs are to be recovered
20.09.2000. Assignment Hearing Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-278/2000
The refusal to decide on the issue of making remarks in the minutes of the court hearing is recognized as a significant violation of the Criminal Procedure Law, therefore the ancillary complaint of the accused is satisfied and the decisions of the appellate court are annulled
15.04.1999. Assignment Hearing Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-104/1999
Appropriate notation shall be made in the case regarding the presentation of the minutes of the court hearing to the accused pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 88 of the Latvian Criminal Procedure Code
14.04.1998. Assignment Hearing Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-149/1998
The provisions of Article 88 of the Latvian Code of Criminal Procedure do not provide for the transmittal of a copy of the minutes of the hearing to the defendant
15.10.1997. Assignment Hearing Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-305/1997
Defendant's reference in the cassation complaint to the incompleteness of the minutes of the court hearing of the appellate court has been disregarded, because after getting acquainted with these minutes no comments on its incompleteness or incorrectness have been submitted in accordance with Section 88 of the Latvian Code of Criminal Procedure
04.11.1997. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-273/1997
When examining the judgment of the appellate court in cassation, the court has disregarded the defendant's indication in the cassation appeal that the court of first instance, by violating Section 88 of the Latvian Code of Criminal Procedure, has not examined the remarks submitted by him regarding the incorrectness and incompleteness of the minutes of the court hearing, because in the re-examination of the case due to factual and legal circumstances, the defendant has not indicated such circumstance
30.09.1997. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-258/1997
If the chairperson of the hearing has agreed to the remarks on the minutes of the hearing with the resolution “attach to the minutes” without a specific confirmation of their correctness, then a resolution of such content shall not be considered a material violation of Section 88 of the Latvian Code of Criminal Procedure, as the remarks have thus become an integral part of the minutes
