Procedural objection

Under a Verfahrensrüge is in German criminal reprimand the revision meant that criticizes the method by which the court has come to the judgment. It is in contrast to the factual complaint with which the factual and legal content of the judgment can be attacked. However, both types of complaint are not mutually exclusive.

In order to be admissible, the procedural complaint must state the facts with which the procedural violation can be proven ( Section 344 (2) sentence 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ). References to files or attachments are not permitted. The appellate court only needs to be able to examine, on the basis of the complainant's submissions, whether there has been a procedural error if the information was correct. The information presented is only checked for correctness in the context of the justification check. The free evidence procedure applies. As an exception, the facts do not need to be stated if they result from the judgment itself and at the same time the general complaint has been made, so that the appeal court has to take note of the entire judgment anyway. This does not change anything, however, that the procedural complaint must be raised anyway. An ex officio examination does not take place.

There are various procedural complaints:

• Explanatory notice
• Epitome complaint
• Casting complaint
• Complaint of the incorrect rejection of an application for evidence
• absolute reasons for revision ( § 338 StPO)

Please note the information on legal issues!