Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
en:thc_recht:strafbefehle_2021 [2022/09/15 16:10] – sosen:thc_recht:strafbefehle_2021 [2026/09/24 13:18] (current) – fabian
Line 5: Line 5:
 A classic procedure in the city of Zurich: First comes a letter from the cantonal police because five hemp seeds have been confiscated by customs. It is good here that it is already clear on the letter: It's about NarcA art. 19a, so it's about a contravention (further down on this page you'll find an example from Zurich, where 19ff is written and so it remains open, if it's not about a misdemeanor). A classic procedure in the city of Zurich: First comes a letter from the cantonal police because five hemp seeds have been confiscated by customs. It is good here that it is already clear on the letter: It's about NarcA art. 19a, so it's about a contravention (further down on this page you'll find an example from Zurich, where 19ff is written and so it remains open, if it's not about a misdemeanor).
  
-| {{:thc_recht:2021zh5samenbrief.jpg}} |+| {{:thc_recht:2021zh5samenbrief.jpg?direct}} |
  
 Nevertheless, one must fill out the questionnaire thoughtfully: So order for own consumption! This is the criterion so that the illegal act is only considered a contravention. (If you have the nerve, you can of course try to deny the order and see if they can prove it to you). No previous consumption is admitted here (this would hardly increase the penalty, but can then alert the road traffic office - in general it is bad if there are too many illegal acts in the files). Nevertheless, one must fill out the questionnaire thoughtfully: So order for own consumption! This is the criterion so that the illegal act is only considered a contravention. (If you have the nerve, you can of course try to deny the order and see if they can prove it to you). No previous consumption is admitted here (this would hardly increase the penalty, but can then alert the road traffic office - in general it is bad if there are too many illegal acts in the files).
  
-| {{:thc_recht:2021zh5samenfragebogen.jpg}} |+| {{:thc_recht:2021zh5samenfragebogen.jpg?direct}} |
  
 This procedure is then followed by a standard summary penalty order, as can be expected in the city of Zurich: This procedure is then followed by a standard summary penalty order, as can be expected in the city of Zurich:
  
-| {{:thc_recht:2021zh5samenstrafbefehl.jpg}} |+| {{:thc_recht:2021zh5samenstrafbefehl.jpg?direct}} |
  
  
Line 82: Line 82:
 Here a few grams of cannabis were seized. Because the amount is less than 10 grams, there is no punishment (minor amount). But the material is confiscated anyway. The justification for this is interesting: they are objects that were intended for the commission of a crime and endanger the safety of people. Therefore, they must be destroyed. I am curious whether the Federal Court will see this the same way (there are similar cases on the way there). Here a few grams of cannabis were seized. Because the amount is less than 10 grams, there is no punishment (minor amount). But the material is confiscated anyway. The justification for this is interesting: they are objects that were intended for the commission of a crime and endanger the safety of people. Therefore, they must be destroyed. I am curious whether the Federal Court will see this the same way (there are similar cases on the way there).
  
-| {{:thc_recht:vernichtungsvefuegung_2021_uster.jpg}} | +| {{:thc_recht:vernichtungsvefuegung_2021_uster.jpg?direct}} | 
-\\ +
Last modified: 2022/09/15 16:10
DEENFR

Legal overview

Shit happens 16 (Summer 2025)

This overview as PDF