The Debrecen Court of Appeal, as a court of the second instance, changed the judgment of the Berettyóújfalu District Court in the criminal proceedings initiated for the crime of animal cruelty at its council meeting held on November 18, 2022.
According to the facts of the final judgment, in Zsáka, on June 5, 2020, at around 12:30 p.m., the second-order defendant looped a noose around the neck of the medium-sized puli-type dog belonging to the first-order defendant and dragged the animal out onto a dirt road, then tied it to an electric pole. The second-rate defendant then struck the animal’s head several times with an ax in the presence of the first-rate. The dog was then left alone and left the scene. The dog died as a result of the injuries caused by the damage to its neck and head. The first accused later returned and took the baby to the nearby wheat field, where he left it to its fate.
In the first instance, the court found the two men guilty of animal cruelty, which the first defendant committed as an accessory to the crime. Therefore, he sentenced the first-rate defendant, as a repeat offender, to 10 months in prison, the execution of which was suspended for a 3-year probationary period, and he ordered his probation, while the second-rate defendant was sentenced to 1 year and 4 months in prison and banned from practicing public affairs for 2 years, and ordered an also the execution of a sentence of 1 year and 8 months of imprisonment imposed by law, suspended for a probationary period.
Against the judgment of the Berettyóújfalu District Court on May 9, 2022, the prosecution appealed for aggravation, considering the imposition of a custodial sentence to be executed in the case of the first-rate accused justified, while in relation to the second-rate accused, it made a motion to implement two additional suspended prison sentences, bearing in mind that the scope of their probationary period the commission of the crime charged under The second-ranked defendant and his lawyer appealed for mitigation, while the first-ranked defendant and his lawyer took note of the first-instance decision.
The tribunal exercised limited review, so the validity of the facts was not the subject of investigation. The criminal council found that the district court’s conclusion of guilt was correct, and it fulfilled its obligation to provide reasons. In the field of circumstances of guilt, two important additions were made in the second instance. An aggravating circumstance concerning both defendants is that their actions were not only suitable for causing the death of the dog but also resulted in it. The additional mitigating circumstance affecting the second-order defendant is that he was a young adult at the time of the crime, not yet 24 years old. Evaluating these circumstances together, the second instance court changed the judgment of the district court with the aggravating and mitigating factors taken into account by the first instance court.
In order to create an internal ratio between the punishments of the accused, the tribunal found it justified to increase the length of the prison sentence imposed on the first accused from 10 months to 1 year and 2 months, however, in addition to being an accessory to the crime, it did not grant the prosecutor’s motion for aggravation with regard to not suspending the execution of the sentence. With regard to the second accused – subject to the mandatory legal provisions – the court also ordered the execution of the two additional sentences of imprisonment suspended for a probationary period, the crime committed by the accused during the probationary period, in addition to the sentence of 1 year and 4 months in prison imposed on him and 2 years from public affairs left the ban in place, finding no reason to mitigate it.
The court’s decision is final.
Court of Debrecen
