Facts
The appellant, lawyer [A.] , represented [B.] as an official defense counsel before the Regional Court of Emmental-Oberaargau. The Regional Court issued its judgment on January 7, 2021. [B.] appealed against this judgment, while lawyer [A.] filed a complaint against the determination of the official compensation. The High Court of the Canton of Bern reduced the official compensation for the first-instance proceedings by 16.5 hours and awarded lawyer [A.] CHF 21,286.80. Lawyer [A.] requests that the High Court's decision be partially repealed and that she be granted an official compensation of CHF 24,160.25.
The appellant had stated in her statement of August 16, 2022, that she accepted the first-instance reduction of the time spent to 101.09 hours and only requested an increase in VAT-liable expenses of CHF 142.80. The lower court granted this increase, but also reduced the time spent by a further 16.5 hours, although the appellant had stated that the time spent was no longer being challenged.
Considerations
The Federal Court must examine whether the lower court rightly reduced the official compensation. The appellant complains of a violation of Art. 404 para. 1 and 2 CrimPC and a breach of the prohibition of arbitrariness under Art. 9 Cst.
The court of appeal reviews the first-instance judgment only in the contested points (Art. 404 para. 1 CrimPC). It can also review non-contested points in favor of the accused person to prevent unlawful or unfair decisions (Art. 404 para. 2 CrimPC). However, the lower court reduced the official compensation under Art. 404 para. 2 CrimPC, although the appellant had stated that the time spent was no longer being challenged.
The assessment of the time spent on the official defense is a discretionary decision. The lower court considered the expenditure of 101.09 hours to be too high, but does not justify a correction ex officio. The first instance had already reduced the…