The website www.at.gov.lv uses only technically necessary cookies that ensure the operation and functionality of the website More information
21.12.2004. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-678/2004
As to the issues of the state of affect and diminished responsibility, it is the expert psychologist's opinion that is relevant
17.08.2004. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-466/2004
Within the meaning of Section 47, Paragraph one of the Latvian Criminal Procedure Code, the infliction of substantial damage is a circumstance provable in a criminal case
21.10.2003. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-577/2003
According to Section 66 of the Latvian Criminal Procedure Code, in order to seize a car as an object used in the commission of a criminal offense, it does not necessarily have to be registered with the Road Traffic Safety Directorate in the name of the offender
25.03.2003. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-170/2003
A specialist's reference on the circumstances of a car accident is not the same evidence as an expert's opinion established by the decision of the conductor of proceedings
04.02.2003. Assignment Hearing Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-75/2003
A judgment of a court of appeal was amended, excluding the confiscation of a car – the instrument of the crime
27.08.2002. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-274/2002
Determining the effect of alcohol using a portable exhaled breath monitoring device is not a criminal procedure activity, so it is not subject to the requirements of the Latvian Criminal Procedure Code
04.06.2002. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-218/2002
Courts of first and appellate instances have rightly recognized as evidence in criminal cases the results of the operational experiment carried out in accordance with Section 15, Paragraph three of the Operational Activities Law of January 14, 1994, regarding which the acceptance of a specially authorized prosecutor was received
04.01.2001. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-2/2001
The court of cassation, without evaluating the evidence on its merits, but considering the issue of the sufficiency of the evidence, recognized that the evidence indicated in the judgment of the appellate court was sufficient for the court to correctly decide the case
14.01.1999. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-1/1999
According to the first paragraph of Article 52 of the Latvian Code of Criminal Procedure, a witness may be examined as a victim
23.12.1998. Assignment Hearing Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-386/1998
Under Article 51 of the Latvian Criminal Procedure Code, the assessment and examination of evidence applies to the facts of the evidence as well as to the means (sources) of the evidence. In any event, the probative value of a fact which is relevant to the case depends on the credibility of the source from which it is derived (in a particular case, whether the victim, by reason of her mental state is capable of rightly perceive facts relevant in the case and is able to testify about them)
18.12.1997. Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-344/1997
In accordance with the provisions of Section 51 of the Latvian Code of Criminal Procedure, no evidence, including the testimony of an eyewitness, has a predetermined force that would bind the court
13.03.1997. Assignment Hearing Decision of the Department of Criminal Cases, case No SKK-96/1997
A victim or witness who, due to his or her physical or mental disabilities, is unable to properly perceive and testify to the circumstances relevant to the case may not be summoned and interrogated at the hearing
