Facts
The Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of St. Gallen lodged a complaint against the decision of the Cantonal Court of St. Gallen, Criminal Chamber, of 8 May 2013/5 January 2015. The Cantonal Court had sentenced [X.] to a prison term of 18 years for murder and refrained from ordering a measure, in particular detention.
The Public Prosecutor's Office requested that the criminal case be referred back to the lower court for the purpose of ordering the detention of [X.] . The lower court had based its decision on a psychiatric expert opinion by Prof. Dr. med. [E.] and Dr. med. [F.] of 9 July 2014, in order to refrain from ordering detention.
[X.] was sentenced by the District Court See-Gaster on 7 June 2012 to a prison term of 17 years for intentional homicide. Both [X.] and the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of St. Gallen appealed against this judgment.
Considerations
The Federal Court examined whether the lower court had evaluated the psychiatric expert opinion of 9 July 2014 in a justifiable manner and, on that basis, rightly refrained from ordering a measure. The Court found that the expert opinion, for formal and substantive reasons, does not constitute a legally sufficient basis for a decision within the meaning of Art. 56 para. 3 SCC.
The expert opinion was prepared to a significant extent by Dr. med. [F.] without prior authorization by the commissioning authority. The participation of Dr. med. [F.] in the preparation of the expert opinion went beyond the permissible use of a mere auxiliary person. The expert opinion can no longer be considered the expertise of the court-appointed expert Prof. Dr. med. [E.] .
The Federal Court found that the expert opinion is not convincing in terms of content. The expert's…