“THE SUPREME COURT’S VIEW ON THE CRIMINAL ACTION OF OBTAINING STOLEN PROPERTY”

Article 480 1 of the Criminal Code states that committing certain acts, which include selling and buying of goods that are known or reasonably suspected to have originated from a criminal act, are categorized as a crime of obtaining stolen property. However, the Criminal Code does not provide limits or explanations on what conditions of goods are considered to originate from criminal acts, including goods in the form of motor vehicles. This condition causes uncertainty about when a person can be said to have sold or bought a motor vehicle reasonably suspected of originating from a criminal act to be punishable by this article. Regarding these problems, the Supreme Court has consistently argued that if a motor vehicle was obtained without a vehicle certificate, it is reasonable to suspect it was obtained from a criminal act. This view can be found in Supreme Court Decision No. 1586 K/Pid/2011 and Supreme Court Decision No. 1750 K/Pid/2012, which states that the Defendant is aware of this, and it is reasonable to suspect that they were obtained from a crime because they are without valid documents. The same opinion can be found in Supreme Court Decision No. 1056 K/Pid/2016, which states that the Defendant should have been able to suspect when buying a motorcycle that was not equipped with documents that the purchased motorcycle was the proceeds of crime.

Source:

Supreme Court Website

Best regards,

Fredrik J. Pinakunary