T.C. SUPREME

10.Criminal Division
Basis: 2016/2295
Verdict: 2016/2077
Decision Date: 30.06.2016

CRIME OF DRUG TRAFFICKING-CONTRARY TO THE DEFENSE OF THE DEFENDANT, WHO DECIDED TO POSTPONE THE OPENING OF A PUBLIC CASE FOR POSSESSION OF DRUGS FOR USE, THERE IS INSUFFICIENT AND CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE THAT THE PERSON HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH HEROIN

SUMMARY: on the content of incident reports, …………. with a live diagnostic report dated, the defendant N..a separate investigation was conducted into the same dated CD footage of his live diagnosis for “possession of a drug for use”.. Y.. M..A..Y..S and other information and documents on file with the expressions for the investigation phase; according to the incident dated 06.11.2015 in regard to the “use for drug possession” charges “to postpone the opening of a criminal case” on the contrary decision of the defendant’s defense; the prosecution as a witness during the phase he listened.. Y..the subject of the crime seized in the case is believed to have something to do with heroin or to be related to the other accused..considering that there is insufficient and conclusive evidence that exceeds the limits of doubt that he participated in his crime, it is not possible to decide the conviction of the accused instead of acquittal.

(5237 P. K. m. 188)

Case and Verdict: The Appeal review was held at the request of the defence at a hearing against the defendants.

File’s been reviewed.

As Necessary, Discussed And Considered:

A) Defendant N.. examination of the conviction sentence against him:

Since it is understood that the proceedings are carried out in accordance with the law, the evidence is shown and discussed in the reasoned decision, the action is determined by the defendant, his conscientious blood is based on precise data in accordance with the documents and information in the file, the type of crime that matches the action and the sanctions are correctly determined; the defendant’s defense is rejected in court with appeals that are not considered in place, the decision to approve the sentence, the amount of the sentence and the time during which he remains under arrest,

B) Defendant A.. examination of the conviction sentence against him:

According to the content of the incident report, the defendant N. with the live diagnostic report dated 07.11.2015.a separate investigation was conducted into the same dated CD footage of his live diagnosis for “possession of a drug for use”.. Y.. M..A..Y..S and other information and documents on file with the expressions for the investigation phase; according to the incident dated 06.11.2015 in regard to the “use for drug possession” charges “to postpone the opening of a criminal case” on the contrary decision of the defendant’s defense; the prosecution as a witness during the phase he listened.. Y..the subject of the crime seized in the case is believed to have something to do with heroin or to be related to the other accused..considering that there is insufficient and conclusive evidence beyond the limits of doubt that he participated in his crime, the defendant’s conviction should be decided instead of acquittal,

Contrary to the law, since the defense of the defendant in the trial with appeals is therefore in place, it was decided unanimously on 30.06.2016 to overturn the sentence, to release the defendant according to the reason for the violation, to write to the relevant prosecutor general’s office to ensure his release if he is not convicted or imprisoned for another crime.