Traffic Criminal Law

The area covered by traffic criminal law includes both traffic offenses and offenses in public roads. The latter include in particular dangerous interventions in road traffic, endangerment of road traffic and drunkenness in traffic.

But also the negligent homicide and the negligent bodily injury belong as mass offenses in the traffic to the processing material of courts, defense lawyers and prosecutors.

Negligence in traffic requires the (undoubted) determination by a court that someone objectively:
1. Has violated a due diligence obligation
2. Its predictability of the causal course and its success
3. Its avoidability of success.
And subjectively the
4. Individual predictability of the causal course of success and the
5. Individual ability to care

If there are any remaining doubts as to any of these conditions, the Court should be exempted from the accusation of discontinuing the procedure, e.g. to impose, or may also refrain from punishment if the consequences of the offense, that have hit the client, are so severe, that the imposition of a penalty would obviously be wrong.

A refrain (§ 60 StGB) from punishment should always be close, if e.g. in the accident the co-driver was seriously injured or even killed by the act. Because then, this personal loss within the act hits the accused and remaining client so hard that a “penalty” would no longer be appropriat.

Both these serious offenses and only the flight from the driver always require a firm defense against the accusation so raised.

To take into account a court on suspicion of traffic accident flight always that this rule is characterized by inaccuracies and very further, partly unconstitutional offender description.

This critic can be an asset to the defense. This is even more important because there is another problem for the driver:
Because often the above-mentioned allegations of the public prosecutor’s office with the provisional confiscation of the driving license and the confiscation of the driving license by the police ( §§ 94 Abs. 3, 111 a StPO 69 StGB).

In this case, the court can even confirm the preliminary deprivation of the driving license in the preliminary investigation, so that a (further) driving a car can then constitute a new offense, namely driving without a license (§ 21 StVG).

Effective defense must therefore aim at the court acting in accordance with § 111a (2) StPO and that it is convinced in advance that the client has not committed any traffic offense under § 69 (2) StGB.

Then by law the preliminary deprivation is to suspend driving license, because her reason subsequently disappeared and the court in the judgment does not revoke the driving license.

The hurdles for a court to collect the driving license under § 69 Abs. 1 StGB in the preliminary investigation or in the main proceedings are significantly higher than those under § 69 Abs 2. StGB.

For in the latter case the so-called character inappropriateness of the defendant is irrefutably assumed by the law, as soon as the taking of evidence signifies a conviction for one of the traffic offenses.

For in the latter case the so-called character inappropriateness of the defendant is irrefutably assumed by the law, as soon as the taking of evidence signifies a conviction for one of the traffic offenses.

The deprivation of the driving license according to § 69 Abs. 1 StGB, however, requires that the cognizant court confirms the unwritten elements in the law, which is difficult per se, because indefinite legal terms are always subjectively when applying law – iE from the point of view of the judge and this varied-filled.

To deprive him of the (occasion) act to prove that someone is unsuitable for driving a motor vehicle is therefore repeatedly raised concerns that lead to the submission of the decision to the Court of Appeal.

Lastly, the large senate of the Federal Court of Justice in 2005 (BGH) therefore considerably restricted the scope of application for certain cases, for example when driving an escape car after a criminal offense, and put a stop to the practice of avoiding driving licenses which escalated from the tribunals.

This post is also available in: German