CEDH · CASELAW;CLIN;ENG — 22 juin 2000

.s3ABFC313 { font-size:10pt } .sD4B5322E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA241FE93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-align:justify; page-break-after:avoid; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s8F2B0B1B { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s97EB40D9 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:14pt; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s5F48796F { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s8B6C6D43 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; border-bottom:1pt solid #000000; padding-bottom:1pt } .sDF790F1E { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Information Note on the Court’s case-law 19 June 2000 Deperrois v. France (dec.) - 48203/99 Decision 22.6.2000 [Section IV] Article 2 of Protocol No. 7 Review of conviction Cassation appeal as only appeal against judgments of the Assize Court: inadmissible The applicant, who was suspected of having introduced cyanide into a bottle of medication, causing the death of a child, was investigated and accused of premeditated poisoning. The Assize Court found the applicant guilty and sentenced him to a twenty-year term of imprisonment and a ten-year suspension of his civil, civic and family rights. The applicant appealed on a point of law against that judgment. The Court dismissed his appeal. Inadmissible under Article 2 of Protocol No. 7: The applicant was unable to lodge an appeal on the “merits” of the judgment convicting him since in French law the only remedy available against a judgment of an Assize Court is a cassation appeal, and the Court of Cassation’s power of review is then limited to questions of law. For the purposes of the present article, however, the States Parties retain the option to decide the procedures for the exercise of the right of review and may restrict its scope: manifestly ill-founded.   © Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court. Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes