Curtea de Apel Bucureşti, Secţia a II-a penală, Decizia nr. 370 din 2 martie 2016 (Jurisprudență comentată)
Bucharest Court of Appeal, Decision no. 370 dated 2.03.2016 (Case Law Study)

Summary/Abstract: In terms with the legal provisions and the submitted evidence, the court of first instance rightfully determined that in the absence of the Operation, Maintenance, and Service Manual of the Motor Vehicle driven by the defendant R.C. it was unable to certainly establish beyond any reasonable doubt that the precise vehicle meant for transportation found in the possession of the defendant of which he was accused of driving without a licence, falls under the category of a moped or a motor tricycle. This assesment holds truth even in the present state of affairs in which the defendant entered a plea of guilty, while the agent who issued the report was heard by the court and stated the fact that he witnesses the presence of the Operation, Maintenance, and Service Manual of the Motor Vehicle, resulting in the fact that the motor vehicle effectuated the legal provisions for being classified as a moped.

• Details
• Contents