Facts
Parties: Appellant [A.] against the Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Aargau and respondent B.
Courts: District Court of Rheinfelden, Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau, Federal Supreme Court (I. criminal division).
Date: June 5, 2024.
Main issue: The appellant [A.] was convicted by the Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau of attempted serious bodily harm and failure to render emergency assistance. On September 19, 2020, he had hit the respondent [B.] with his vehicle and subsequently driven away without providing assistance or notifying the authorities.
Legal question: Whether the failure to render emergency assistance is to be qualified as an ancillary offense of the attempted serious bodily harm or whether there is a real concurrence between these offenses.
Considerations
The appellant [A.] was convicted by the Higher Court of the Canton of Aargau of attempted serious bodily harm and failure to render emergency assistance. On September 19, 2020, he had hit the respondent [B.] with his vehicle and subsequently driven away without providing assistance or notifying the authorities.
The Federal Supreme Court examined whether the failure to render emergency assistance is to be qualified as an ancillary offense of the attempted serious bodily harm or whether there is a real concurrence between these offenses. According to Art. 128 SCC, failure to render emergency assistance is punishable if someone does not help a person whom they have injured, or a person who is in immediate danger of death, although it could be expected of them under the circumstances.
The Federal Supreme Court found that the failure to render emergency assistance in the present case did not…