The offender’s car was confiscated even though it was registered to his wife
[ad_1]
This happened after the intervention of the Supreme Court
Only an appeal to the Supreme Court helped to seize the car of a resident of the Komi Republic, who was repeatedly caught driving while intoxicated. The problem was that the car of the persistent offender was registered in his wife’s name.
Previously, the citizen twice fell into the hands of the servants of the law, and both times he refused to undergo a medical examination, which, according to the law, indicates his guilt. He was subjected to administrative penalties, but was caught again in August last year. This time he failed to get off administratively, and he was subjected to criminal prosecution.
The court sentenced him to 10 months of forced labor with the deduction of 10% of his salary, banned him from driving for 2 years and 10 months and fined him 224 thousand rubles. But the arrest of the previously arrested crime weapon, the car, was lifted. The fact is that several months earlier the car was purchased in the name of the offender’s wife, that is, according to the opinion of the court of first instance, which was left unchanged by the courts of appeal and cassation, the car had to be given back.
The Prosecutor General’s Office did not agree with this. Deputy Prosecutor General Igor Tkachev filed a complaint with the Supreme Court. In it, he, in particular, pointed out that confiscation of a car is a non-alternative measure of a criminal law nature and the most effective means of preventing the perpetrators from repeatedly committing similar crimes. And the execution of a contract for the sale and purchase of a car in the name of a spouse is not at all an obstacle to confiscation. Regardless of who the car is registered to, the car was purchased while the couple was married, which means, by law, it is the joint property of the spouses, and not just the wife.
Having considered the case materials, the Supreme Court supported the position of the prosecutor’s office. The decisions of the courts of three instances were cancelled, the case will be reconsidered in the court of first instance by a different panel.
[ad_2]
Source link
