The Regional Court in criminal proceedings is the court that has jurisdiction over serious criminal charges and at the same time exercises judicial control over the investigation. It decides not only on guilt, acquittal and punishment in the main hearing, but also beforehand on detention on remand, house searches, seizures and the admissibility of evidence.

The Regional Court thus shapes the entire course of criminal proceedings, because its early decisions determine what pressure is exerted on the accused and what evidence may be used later. Anyone accused before the Regional Court is therefore in proceedings with high legal and personal risk.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Criminal proceedings before the Regional Court

The Regional Court deals with those criminal cases that the legislator classifies as particularly significant in legal or factual terms. These include, above all, offences with a higher penalty, complex economic and property offences, as well as serious violent and sexual offences.

For defendants, this means proceedings with greater pressure, more intensive taking of evidence and a considerably greater risk of sanctions. Even a single incorrect decision in the initial phase can no longer be reversed later.

For this reason, the outcome of Regional Court proceedings is not only decided in the main hearing, but often already where the court rules on detention, searches and the use of evidence.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Legal position of the Regional Court in criminal proceedings

The Code of Criminal Procedure assigns the Regional Court a dual role.

In the investigation proceedings, it is the court that controls the public prosecutor’s office. The individual judge of the Regional Court decides in particular on:

• Remand
• Seizure and realisation of assets
• Coercive measures
• Objections to investigative measures
• Applications for termination of proceedings

The Regional Court is the court of control in the investigation proceedings. Whenever fundamental rights are interfered with, for example by detention, searches or seizures, the public prosecutor’s office may not decide alone. The court must examine, approve or revoke these measures.

In the main proceedings, the Regional Court conducts the hearing, takes the evidence and ultimately decides on guilt or acquittal as well as on the sentence. Depending on the type of offence, either an individual judge, a court with lay judges or a court with jurors decides.

Appeals court of the District Court

The Regional Court is not only a court of first instance in criminal matters. It also decides as a panel of three judges on appeals and complaints against decisions of the District Courts. This includes appeals against judgements as well as complaints against orders. The Regional Court is therefore the central supervisory authority between the District Court and the higher courts.

The Regional Court is therefore not merely a higher level, but the point at which investigative pressure and judicial decision converge.

For this reason, it is crucial to defend early and in a structured manner before incriminating decisions become entrenched.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

Subject-matter jurisdiction in criminal proceedings

Subject-matter jurisdiction determines whether proceedings are conducted before the District Court or the Regional Court.

As soon as the statutory penalty is more than one year’s imprisonment, the Regional Court has jurisdiction pursuant to § 31 StPO. This limit of jurisdiction decides whether proceedings are conducted before the District Court or before the Regional Court.

Regional Court as a single judge

The individual judge of the Regional Court decides in all criminal cases that are above the jurisdiction of the District Court, but for which the law does not provide for the participation of lay judges or jurors.

This includes in particular proceedings with a penalty of more than one year’s imprisonment, as long as there is no special assignment to a court of lay judges or jurors. The individual judge conducts the entire main hearing, takes the evidence and decides alone on guilt, acquittal and punishment. In practice, this composition concerns the largest part of the proceedings before the Regional Court.

Regional Court as a court of lay assessors

In the case of certain offences, the Regional Court decides together with lay judges, i.e. legally untrained lay judges, who vote together with a professional judge on guilt and punishment.

Regional Court as a jury court

For particularly serious criminal offences, the Regional Court decides with jurors, i.e. citizens without legal training, who vote on the question of guilt, while the professional judges decide on the sentence.

The decisive factor is therefore not the individual case, but the law determines which form of decision applies. Anyone who fails to recognise this loses strategic ground.

Criminal cases that do not end up before the Regional Court

Not every criminal case belongs before the Regional Court. Offences with a minor penalty are conducted before the District Court.

Whether proceedings are conducted before the District Court or before the Regional Court depends on how serious the alleged offence is classified by law. Minor offences go to the District Court, more serious ones to the Regional Court.

This classification determines which procedural rules apply, which judges decide and what pressure is exerted on the accused.

Local jurisdiction in criminal proceedings

In the investigation proceedings, the Regional Court at whose seat the public prosecutor’s office that is conducting the proceedings is located is generally responsible. For those affected, this means: As a rule, the court that belongs to the public prosecutor’s office that is conducting the investigations is responsible.

In the main proceedings, the place of the offence is the primary factor. If this cannot be determined or is located abroad, further legal connecting factors such as the place of success or the residence of the accused apply. The law lays down a fixed order according to which it is determined which court has jurisdiction if the place of the offence is unclear or is located abroad.

Local jurisdiction influences which judges, which evidence and which procedural speed are decisive. It is therefore a real defence factor.

Form of decision and procedure

In the investigation proceedings, the individual judge at the Regional Court regularly decides, especially on detention, seizure and coercive measures.

In the main proceedings, the Regional Court decides either

• by an individual judge or
• in a special form of decision with lay judges or jurors.

These special forms of decision differ primarily in the composition of the court and in the type of decision-making, but are only presented here in their basic features.

The court decides on guilt, punishment and legal consequences with a judgement. It decides on procedural measures and coercive measures with an order, depending on the type of judicial decision.

Hierarchy of Courts

Depending on the type of decision, different remedies are available against decisions of the Regional Court. These enable a review by higher courts if legal errors or procedural defects are asserted.

In practice, the following applies: Errors of the first instance can only be repaired to a limited extent. What is not properly established here continues to have an effect up to the highest instance.

Your Benefits with Legal Assistance

Criminal proceedings before the Regional Court are not routine. The penalties are high, the interventions are massive and the tactical errors are expensive.

Legal defence ensures that

• the jurisdiction and form of decision are correctly examined,
• coercive measures are immediately challenged under the law,
• evidence is secured early and exculpatory circumstances are presented,
• statements are made strategically and do not cause harm later,
• appeal options are considered from the outset.

Especially before the Regional Court, it is not only the accusation that decides, but the quality of the defence, whether proceedings remain controllable or get out of control.

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation

FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions

Select Your Preferred Appointment Now:Free initial consultation