T.C. THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT
Date of Decision: 28.06.2016
INTENTIONAL INJURY CRIME – THE DEFENDANT WHO IS UNDERSTOOD NOT TO HAVE COMPLETED THE AGE OF FIFTEEN AT THE TIME OF THE CRIME – ALTHOUGH A DISCOUNT SHOULD BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TURKISH CRIMINAL CODE, AN EXCESS PENALTY DETERMINATION BY MAKING A DISCOUNT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ARTICLE OF THE LAW – VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION
ABSTRACT: According to the scope of the file, kayden … was born and it is understood that he did not supply fifteen years of age on the date of the crime, the sentence determined by the defendant should be reduced in accordance with the article of the Turkish Criminal Code, but the sentence should be overturned by betting, as there was no hit in the determination of excessive punishment by making a discount in accordance with the article of the said Law.
(5237 P.K. m.31, 52, 62, 86) (5271 P.K. m.231)
Case: The defendant is accused of wounding with intent … according to Articles 86/2, 86/3-e, 31/3, 62 and 52/2 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237. according to articles 2,000,00 of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271 of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 231/5, 231/8 and 5395 of the Child Protection Law No. 23/1 of the Criminal Procedure Code to be punished with a judicial fine of 2,000,00 Turkish liras. in accordance with the articles on the withdrawal of disclosure of the provision, the establishment of an audit period of 3 years….. 25/12/2009 and 2008/841, 2009/441, following the Decision of the Juvenile Court, the child who was dragged into the crime during the trial period for committing a new crime due to the disclosure of the provision previously given by the said Court, the defendant’s Law No. 5237 86/2, 86/3-e, 31/3, 62 and 52/2 of the Law No. 5237. 2,000,00 to be punished with a judicial penalty, in accordance with articles that have the same court dated 15/12/2015 2015/545 based on the date and the Ministry of justice against the decision of 2015/715 26.04.2016 2016/2468 with this type of prompt reversal of this work was in favor of the law because of the public prosecutor’s office and the court of Appeals the case file No. 2016/189062 17.05.2016 date with our apartment being sent to tebligname constant were evaluated.
As mentioned in the notice;
According to the scope of the file, Kayden was born on 30/09/1993 and was sentenced to 31/2 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 for the sentence imposed on the defendant who was found not to have served the age of 15 on 27/05/2008 when the crime was committed. although discounts are required in accordance with Article 31/3 of the said Law. according to article 309 of CMK No. 5271, with a bet that there are no hits in the determination of excessive penalties by making a discount.it became clear that the need to overturn the decision referred to in accordance with the article was notified.
It was discussed and considered as necessary:
23 of the Child Protection Law. within the 3-year audit period established in accordance with Article 231/11 of the CMK, the case statute of limitations will stop. in paragraph 1 of the article, it is regulated that the provision will be announced by the court if it violates the obligations related to the probation measure, and taking into account that the fixed statute of limitations will begin to be re-processed on the date of the commission of a new crime, the act of intentional wounding charged with the defendant is 66 of Law No. 5237. 4 years of the original article are calculated according to the timeout, the query is performed when the timeout expires between the date 4 year history with the original sentencing 17.02.2009 in respect of any failure of the law was not to be made on whether the benefit of the cause of ruining of the report to be sent to the Ministry of Justice of the Supreme Court to the public prosecutor to the depositary; other law for the benefit of prompt investigation of the destruction after use discretion; 28.06.2016 day, unanimously, it was decided.