Facts
The appellant X. was convicted by the District Court of Zurich for multiple simple and aggravated offenses against the Narcotics Act, violence and threats against officials, simple bodily harm, theft of a motor vehicle, and driving without a license. On appeal, he was partially acquitted and sentenced to a partially suspended custodial sentence of 18 months by the High Court of the Canton of Zurich.
X. filed a criminal complaint against the judgment of the High Court. He alleged a violation of articles of the Swiss Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) and claimed that all findings from the surveillance measures obtained since July 12, 2013 were inadmissible.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court upheld the complaint to the extent that it was considered. It stated that the authorization for the surveillance of the postal and telecommunications traffic of a target person does not also cover the surveillance of the non-accused communication partner. Findings about criminal offenses of persons who are not accused of a criminal act in the surveillance order are incidental findings within the meaning of Article 278 paragraph 2 CPC, the use of which requires the approval of the compulsory measures court.
In the present case, the appellant was not listed as an accused person in the surveillance orders against A. Therefore, the findings about the criminal offenses of the appellant in the period from January 20 to March 11, 2015 were incidental findings, for the use of which no approval was obtained.…