Decision To Overturn The Crime Of Theft Due To The Lack Of Conclusive And Sufficient Evidence - AŞIKOĞLU LAW OFFİCE
Aşıkoğlu started his position as the Alanya Public Prosecutor in 2009 and continued until 2013 when he quit his position to initiate his career as an attorney at law.
alanya,hukuk,bürosu,avukat,dava,danışma,mehmet,aşıkoğlu,mehmet aşıkoğlu,savcı,eski,ceza,ticaret,haciz,alacak,borçlar,Mehemet,Aşıkoğlu,alanya,avukat,hukuk,bürosu,alanya avukat, mehmet aşıkoğlu, alanya hukuk bürosu,Kerim Uysal,Kerem Yağdır,ahmet sezer, mustafa demir, hüsnü sert, jale karakaya, murat aydemir, ayşegül yanmaz
17473
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-17473,single-format-standard,ajax_fade,page_not_loaded,,side_area_uncovered_from_content,qode-theme-ver-14.2,qode-theme-bridge,wpb-js-composer js-comp-ver-6.13.0,vc_responsive
 

Decision To Overturn The Crime Of Theft Due To The Lack Of Conclusive And Sufficient Evidence

14 Oct Decision To Overturn The Crime Of Theft Due To The Lack Of Conclusive And Sufficient Evidence

Posted at 14:55h in General by
0 Likes

T.C Supreme Court 2. Department Of The Penal Code No: 2014/30129 Decision No: 2016/9161, D. Date: 12.5.2016

Court :Criminal Court of First Instance
Crime : theft, disturbing housing immunity
Sentencing: conviction
File reviewed and considered necessary;
I – the child who was dragged into the crime … and the defendants … and … in the review of the appeal request for the provisions of the conviction against him;
Defendants ….. and ……. about TCK 53. the decision of the Constitutional Court on the cancellation of some parts of the article entered into force on 24/11/2015 08/10/2015 day and 2014/140 basis, 2015/85 was also taken into consideration in the execution phase of the application of the deprivation of rights provided for in this article.
The hearing, the evidence collected, the reason, the judge’s opinion and discretion in accordance with the request for approval of the provisions with the rejection of the appeal is not in place,
II-in the examination of the appeal against the provisions of the conviction against the accused … and the child who was dragged into the crime … ;
1-in the face of understanding that the defendant …was convicted of another crime around the same jurisdiction on the date of sentencing; without asking whether the defendant wanted to be immune from the trial and without making a decision on this issue, the verdict was announced at the Hearing dated 08/03/2013 by deciding that he was convicted, 5271 CMK 196. restriction of the right to defense in violation of the article,
2 – a child dragged into a crime …in the face of the defense that he did not commit discarded crimes, a child dragged into a crime or other crime … and defendants ….., …… and ……’he had participated in that crime the punishment is sure enough, and convincing evidence the absence of appropriate written obligations of acquittal without considering the law instead of deciding on,
It was unanimously decided on 12/05/2016 that the provisions should be overturned for the reasons described, as the child’s defense and the defendant’s appeals were considered in place in this regard.

Tags:
, , , , , ,
No Comments

Post A Comment

GermanTurkeyRussiaFinlandIran