Facts
The District Court of Kreuzlingen convicted X. of intentional homicide and attempted intentional homicide and sentenced him to 15 years' imprisonment, and ordered him to pay the procedural costs. The High Court of the Canton of Thurgau upheld the judgment and additionally ordered X. to pay the court fees of the second instance.
X. filed a criminal complaint and requested that the judgment be set aside and the case be remanded to the lower court for a new assessment. In particular, he complained that he had been wrongly ordered to pay the costs of the investigative detention, police costs, and the costs of cleaning the crime scene.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court states that the costs of investigative or preventive detention are not expenses within the meaning of Art. 422 para. 2 CrimPC and therefore may not be imposed on the convicted person pursuant to Art. 426 para. 1 CrimPC. The same applies to the costs of guarding for security purposes during a hospital stay.
For services provided by the police in their capacity as a criminal authority in a specific criminal proceeding, no expenses may be charged to the convicted person - apart from any expenses for materials. Insofar as police costs were imposed on the appellant, it is unclear whether…