Facts
The appellant [X.] was sentenced by penal order of 28 June 2012 to a fine of 120 daily rates of CHF 80.-- for multiple forgery of documents, driving a motor vehicle despite revocation of the driver's license, and attempted driving of a motor vehicle despite revocation of the driver's license. The penal order was served by registered mail on 9 July 2012 and notified for collection by the post office on 10 July 2012. [X.] did not collect the mail, which was returned to the Public Prosecutor's Office of Baden on 18 July 2012. The Public Prosecutor's Office served the penal order on him by regular mail on 20 July 2012.
[X.] filed an objection to the penal order with the Public Prosecutor's Office on 30 July 2012 (received by fax on 1 August 2012, mailed in Skopje/Macedonia on 1 August 2012). The Presidency of the District Court of Baden did not consider the objection due to late filing on 4 September 2012 and declared the penal order final. The appeal filed by [X.] against this decision was dismissed by the Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau, Appeal Chamber in Criminal Matters, on 12 February 2013.
Considerations
The Federal Court had to decide whether the time limit for objection to the penal order had been observed. According to Art. 354 para. 1 CrimPC, the objection must be filed with the Public Prosecutor's Office within 10 days. Pursuant to Art. 85 para. 4 lit. a CrimPC, a registered mail that has not been collected is deemed to have been served on the seventh day after the unsuccessful attempt to serve it, provided that the person could have expected the service.
The Federal Court found that the appellant could have expected the service of notifications from the criminal authorities due to the questioning by the Baden city police on 9 January 2012 and the information about the initiation of a criminal preliminary proceeding. The collection notice for the registered mail is deemed to have…