Facts

Parties:

  • Appellant: [X.]
  • Respondent: Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Zurich

Facts:

  • The Public Prosecutor's Office of Zurich-Limmat discontinued the criminal proceedings against [X.] regarding multiple attempted serious bodily harm, assault, and simple bodily harm, but issued a penalty order for affray at the same time.
  • [X.] was convicted of affray by the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich.
  • [X.] filed an appeal in criminal matters, arguing that the discontinuance decision and the penalty order are based on the same incident and thus the principle of "ne bis in idem" is violated.

Considerations

The appellant argues that the discontinuance decision of the Public Prosecutor's Office and the penalty order are based on the same incident and thus the principle of "ne bis in idem" is violated. The Federal Supreme Court finds that the principle of "ne bis in idem" only applies in case of double identity, i.e., the same offense and the same legal assessment. In the present case, however, there is no double identity, as the discontinuance decision and the penalty order represent different legal assessments of the same incident.

Furthermore, the appellant complains of a violation of the duty to inform pursuant to Art. 158 para. 1 lit. a CrimPC. The Federal Supreme Court finds, however, that the appellant was sufficiently informed about the allegation of affray during the interrogation and thus there is…