If There Is More Than One Qualified Case For Deliberate Wounding, How Is The Basic Penalty Determined? - 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
16201
post-template-default,single,single-post,postid-16201,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
 

If There Is More Than One Qualified Case For Deliberate Wounding, How Is The Basic Penalty Determined?

23 Dec If There Is More Than One Qualified Case For Deliberate Wounding, How Is The Basic Penalty Determined?

Posted at 15:09h in General by
0 Likes

T. C. SUPREME COURT

3.Ceza Office
Principal: 2017/6688
Decision: 2018/607
Date of Decision: 22.01.2018

INJURY OF THE INJURY OF THE INJURY OF THE INJURY OF THE INJURY OF THE INJURY OF THE INJURY OF THE INJURY OF THE INJURY

ABSTRACT: As a result of the act of wounding, the participant has been injured in a way that endangers both his life and his condition, and this situation may cause the situation to be distanced from the lower limit only in determining the basic punishment. it should be considered that he is responsible for the act of wounding.

(5237 S. K. m. 53, 86, 87) (ANY. MAH. 08.10.2015 T. 2014/140 E. 2015/85 K.)

The case given by the local court was read and the documents were read;

His need was discussed and considered;

The rejection of other appeals, which are not seen on the ground, but;

The accused acted as a result of the act of wounding both the person who endangered his life and the fact that he was injured in a way to cause a fracture of the bone. noting that it will be accountable, after the application according to the articles 86/1, 87/1-d-end of TCK, it has been decided that the TCK will have a right of 87/3. determination of excess penalty to the accused by increasing the penalty in accordance with

In case the defendant’s action is fixed with the statement of the doctor and the statement of the defendant in compliance with the statement of the participant with the stool staged from the weapon, the missing penalty determination,

The deprivation of some of the provisions of Article 53 of TPC No. 5237 with the decision of the Constitutional Court dated 08.10.2015 and numbered 2014/140 with the decision no. the legal status of the defendant in terms of re-evaluation,

Because of this reason, as the appeal of the accused appealed on the spot, the provisions of the Law no. In accordance with Article 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 1412, in force, it was decided unanimously on the date of 22.01.2018 to reserve the right of the accused pursuant to Article 326 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

No Comments

Post A Comment

GermanTurkeyRussiaFinlandIran