THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
The Decision Of The Supreme Court
Communiqué No: 1-2013/232528
Court: Istanbul Anadolu 7. High Criminal Court
Date and number: 07/11/2012, 2011/203 (E) and 2012/321 (K)
Accused: M.. E..
Crime: premeditated killing
ON BEHALF OF THE TURKISH NATION
The evidence collected was examined at the time of the verdict and the defendant Mustafa accepted the charge of killing Ibrahim.,
determining the nature of the crime in accordance with the occurrence and the results of the investigation, reducing the sentence of admirable cause
his character was commended, his defence was rejected on credible grounds, given according to the file under review
the defendant’s defence must stand trial because there is no evidence of impropriety other than the reason for the conviction.
in the review and appeal petition made due to legitimate defence, criminal nature, unfair incitement
denial of Appeals that the discount was low and not seen in place,
But;
The witness developed in line with the defendant’s defence and this statement, which was captured 21 days after the incident
that the kokoreççı shop where the incident occurred could not be ruled on the basis of their statements.
witness Ebubekir, the owner of the armrest in the heat of the testimony given by the witnesses Volkan and Kadir statements
in view, it is unclear which side started the fight because of the reverse look.
on the face of it, the TCK stipulates a prison sentence of 12 to 18 years.nun 29. article
in determining the level of propulsion, rather than the determination of a penalty near the upper limit, during its implementation
determination of incomplete sentence by giving a written sentence of 15 years imprisonment,
As the appeal appeals of the attendee are therefore seen in place,
your judgment is Cmuk’s 321. in accordance with the article of the communiqué contrary to the idea of corruption,
refusal of the defendant’s request for release based on the amount of the fine and the duration of the detention,
It was decided by unanimous decision on day 18/11/2014.
This decision was made on the day of 18/11/2014 in the presence of the Public Prosecutor of the Supreme Court and the defendant M.. E.. in the absence of Defense Counsel 20/11/2014
in his day, it was explained in detail and procedure.