{"status":"available","ecli":"ECLI:DE:BGH:2022:200422B6STR23.22.0","court":"BGH","senate":"6. Strafsenat","decided":"2022-04-20","aktenzeichen":"6 StR 23/22","doktyp":"Beschluss","leitsatz":null,"text_plain":"BUNDESGERICHTSHOF\nBESCHLUSS\n6 StR 23/22\n\nvom\n20. April 2022\nin der Strafsache\ngegen\n\nwegen Totschlags\n\nECLI:DE:BGH:2022:200422B6STR23.22.0\n\nDer 6. Strafsenat des Bundesgerichtshofs hat am 20. April 2022 beschlossen:\n\nAuf Antrag des Pflichtverteidigers Rechtsanwalt S. vom\n19. April 2022 wird die Erforderlichkeit einer Dienstreise zum genannten Angeklagten in die Jugendanstalt Raßnitz festgestellt.\n\nGründe:\n\n1 Dem nach § 46 Abs. 2 RVG gestellten Antrag des Pflichtverteidigers, dessen Bestellung gemäß § 143 Abs. 1 StPO auch im Revisionsverfahren einschließlich der Hauptverhandlung fortbesteht, war stattzugeben. Erforderlich sind\ndiejenigen Auslagen, ohne die der beigeordnete Rechtsanwalt die Interessen des\nAngeklagten nicht sachgerecht wahrnehmen kann (vgl. Mayer/Kroiß, Rechtsanwaltsvergütungsgesetz, 8. Aufl., 2021, § 46 Rn. 26).\n\nSander König Feilcke\n\nTiemann Fritsche\n\nVorinstanz:\nLandgericht Magdeburg, 14.09.2021 - 22 KLs 164 Js 37644/20 (2/21)","source":null,"source_url":null,"url":"https://recht.nulegal.eu/rechtsprechung/bgh/2022-04-20/6-str-23-22","cited_norms":[{"jurabk":"StPO","ref":"§ 143","ref_norm":"143","n":1},{"jurabk":"RVG","ref":"§ 46","ref_norm":"46","n":1}],"authoritative_source":null,"attribution":null,"source_info":{"name":"nu:legal Deutsches Recht","operator":"Nulegal GmbH","terms":"https://recht.nulegal.eu/nutzungsbedingungen","attribution":"Source: nu:legal – recht.nulegal.eu","license_url":"https://recht.nulegal.eu/license","url":"https://recht.nulegal.eu/rechtsprechung/bgh/2022-04-20/6-str-23-22","retrieved":"2026-10-24 07:56:57.194025+00:00"},"card":{"id":"bgh/2022-04-20/6-str-23-22","court":"BGH","court_id":"bgh","court_as_stated":"BGH","panel":"6. Strafsenat","date":"2022-04-20","dockets":["6 StR 23/22"],"decision_type":"Beschluss","ecli":"ECLI:DE:BGH:2022:200422B6STR23.22.0","ids":{"ecli":"ECLI:DE:BGH:2022:200422B6STR23.22.0"},"cite_as":"BGH, Beschluss vom 20.04.2022 – 6 StR 23/22","url":"https://recht.nulegal.eu/rechtsprechung/bgh/2022-04-20/6-str-23-22","headnotes":[],"leitsatz_status":"not_captured","tenor":{"text":"Auf Antrag des Pflichtverteidigers Rechtsanwalt S. vom\n19. April 2022 wird die Erforderlichkeit einer Dienstreise zum genannten Angeklagten in die Jugendanstalt Raßnitz festgestellt.","basis":"court_formula","source":null},"tenor_status":"held","cited_norms":[{"id":"StPO/143","law":"StPO","abbreviation":"StPO","ref":"143","label":"§ 143 StPO","mentions":1},{"id":"RVG/46","law":"RVG","abbreviation":"RVG","ref":"46","label":"§ 46 RVG","mentions":1}],"cited_norms_basis":"extracted_from_text","normenkette":null,"proceeding":{"entries":[{"position":1,"court":"LG Magdeburg","court_id":null,"court_as_stated":"LG Magdeburg","date":"2021-09-14","docket":"22 KLs 2/21","decision_type":null,"ecli":null,"id":null,"url":null,"is_this_decision":false,"is_held":false},{"position":2,"court":"BGH","court_id":"bgh","court_as_stated":"BGH","date":"2022-04-20","docket":"6 StR 23/22","decision_type":"Beschluss","ecli":"ECLI:DE:BGH:2022:200422B6STR23.22.0","id":"bgh/2022-04-20/6-str-23-22","url":"https://recht.nulegal.eu/rechtsprechung/bgh/2022-04-20/6-str-23-22","is_this_decision":true,"is_held":true},{"position":3,"court":"BGH","court_id":"bgh","court_as_stated":"BGH","date":"2022-06-15","docket":"6 StR 23/22","decision_type":"Urteil","ecli":"ECLI:DE:BGH:2022:150622U6STR23.22.0","id":"bgh/2022-06-15/6-str-23-22","url":"https://recht.nulegal.eu/rechtsprechung/bgh/2022-06-15/6-str-23-22","is_this_decision":false,"is_held":true}],"has_records":true,"note":"As the courts' records state it (getProceeding). No outcome is given."},"fundstellen":[],"provenance":{"source":null,"source_url":null,"retrieved_at":"2026-10-24T07:56:57.194025+00:00","text_quality":"native","attribution":null},"ai_summary":null,"ai_summary_available":false}}