By judgment of 28 July 1987 the Graasten City Court found the driver guilty of the charges brought against him and sentenced him to a fine of 600 DKK.

regarding the question of guilt is necessary.

The applicant also asserted that the statements made to the press by the judge dealing with his case had indicated that she was persuaded of his guilt, in breach of Article 6 § 2.

It also found that the sentence imposed on the applicant was fair and just, considering the offence for which he had been found guilty.

Having examined the evidence produced at the trial, the court considers that [the applicant’s] guilt has not been established.

On an unspecified date the jury returned a guilty verdict against the applicant and three other defendants.

Vu la procédure suivante : Par une requête, enregistrée le 25 août 2021, Mme B A, représentée par Me Guillier, demande au tribunal : 1°) d'annuler le titre exécutoire, d'un montant de 247,07 euros,

Twelve of the fourteen verdicts returned at this stage were guilty verdicts; two were not guilty verdicts. 19.     The jury resumed their deliberations on 8 May (the next working day).

By an appeal judgment of 8 February 2024 confirming a first-instance judgment, the applicant was found guilty of the offence at issue and condemned to a suspended sentence of imprisonment of four months

A..., représenté par Me Guillier, doit être regardé comme demandant au juge des référés, sur le fondement de l’article L. 521-1 du code de justice administrative : 1°) de l’admettre au bénéfice de l

’s guilt (“ Novosti News” ).

    On 15 June 2007 the County Court found the applicant guilty as charged and imposed a three-year suspended sentence.

trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-1 - Reasonable time);No violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Criminal proceedings;Article 6-2 - Presumption of innocence;Proved guilty

Moody was not guilty.        ... there is no jurisdiction over a trial judge on trial on      indictment.

He thus had a predetermined view on his guilt and should have been excluded from participating at the trial.

before his guilt has been proved according to law.

As for the justification for his detention as being “of unsound mind”, the Court further notes that he has been found guilty of various heinous crimes.

It found the rest of the defendants guilty as charged and sentenced them to imprisonment (most of them to seven years).

On 30   October 2017 the Cherepovets Town Court of the Vologda Region found the applicant guilty as charged and gave him a conditional sentence of 2.5 years’ imprisonment and a 3 years’ driving ban

On 18   August 2015 the District Court found the defendants guilty as charged. The applicant was sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment and a fine. The defendants appealed.