Facts

Parties: Appellant X. against the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Lucerne

Facts:

  • On November 10, 2014, A. filed a criminal complaint against X. for coercion and threats.
  • The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Lucerne issued a penal order on February 24, 2015, in which X. was found guilty of coercion and a conditional fine as well as a penalty were imposed.
  • In the same penal order, the proceedings for threats were partially dismissed because A. had not been put in fear or terror by the threats.
  • X. filed an appeal, whereupon the Public Prosecutor's Office issued a new penal order with a slightly amended indictment, but left the partial dismissal unconsidered.
  • The District Court of Willisau found X. guilty of coercion and attempted coercion on March 17, 2016.
  • The Canton Court of Lucerne confirmed the first-instance judgment on June 13, 2017.
  • X. filed an appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.

Main question: Whether the partial dismissal of the proceedings for threats precludes a conviction for (attempted) coercion.

Considerations

The Public Prosecutor's Office may fully or partially dismiss the proceedings (Art. 319 para. 1 CrimPC). A partial dismissal is only possible if several life events or acts in the procedural sense are to be assessed, which are accessible to separate disposal. A partial dismissal is not permissible if it merely involves a different legal assessment of the same life event.

The principle of 'ne bis in idem' (Art. 11 para. 1 CrimPC) prohibits renewed criminal prosecution for the same offense. A final dismissal decision is equivalent to an acquittal (Art. 320 para. 4 CrimPC). Identity of offense exists if the same or essentially the same facts underlie the first and second criminal proceedings.

In the present case, it is the same life event that forms the basis for both the…