Facts

Parties:

  • Appellant: [A.] , represented by attorney Markus Huber
  • Respondent: Public Prosecutor's Office of the Canton of Zurich

Facts:

  • On March 25, 2022, [A.] was found guilty of qualified gross violation of traffic regulations by the District Court of Dietikon and sentenced to 43 months' imprisonment.
  • The Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich confirmed the guilty verdict on July 10, 2023, and imposed an additional sentence of 30 months' imprisonment as well as deportation for six years.
  • [A.] filed an appeal requesting the annulment of the guilty verdict and the sentence as well as the annulment of the deportation.

Main points of the appeal:

  • Arbitrary findings of fact regarding speed and motivation of the overtaking maneuver.
  • Violation of the duty to state reasons and the right to be heard.
  • Incorrect conviction for qualified gross violation of traffic regulations.
  • Inappropriate sentencing.
  • Violation of the duty to state reasons in the context of sentencing.
  • Violation of the principle of investigation.
  • Disproportionate deportation and SIS listing.

Considerations

The Federal Supreme Court reviews the cantonal records ex officio and examines the appeal of [A.] against the judgment of the Higher Court of the Canton of Zurich. The lower court comprehensively established and justified the facts, which is why the appeal of [A.] regarding the allegation of arbitrariness is unfounded. The lower court correctly assessed the speed of [A.] 's vehicle as well as the motivation for the overtaking maneuver, and the findings of fact are not arbitrary.

The lower court did not violate the duty to state reasons and the right to be heard of [A.] . The lower court considered the first-instance reasoning and presented its own arguments that are in line with the reasoning of the first instance. The lower court imposed the sentence in accordance with the statutory provisions and appropriately weighed the sentencing factors. The lower court rightly affirmed the qualified gross violation of traffic regulations by [A.] , as the overtaking maneuver was reckless and senseless and involved a high risk of an accident with severe injuries or fatalities.

The lower court imposed the sentence in accordance with the statutory provisions and appropriately weighed the sentencing factors. The lower court rightly affirmed the qualified gross violation of traffic regulations by [A.] , as the overtaking maneuver was reckless and senseless and involved a high risk of an accident with severe injuries or fatalities. The lower court imposed the sentence in accordance with the…