T.C. SUPREME COURT DECISION
10.Criminal Department
Base: 2016/2295
Decision: 2016/2077
Date of Decision: 30.06.2016
DRUG TRAFFICKING CRIME – CONTRARY TO THE DEFENSE OF THE DEFENDANT, WHO DECIDED TO POSTPONE THE OPENING OF A PUBLIC TRIAL FOR POSSESSION OF DRUGS FOR USE, THERE IS INSUFFICIENT AND CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE THAT THE PERSON HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH HEROIN
SUMMARY: According to the content of the event report, …………. with a dated record of live diagnostics, defendant N..CD images of the same date related to the live diagnosis of Ö, which were investigated separately for the crime of “possession of drugs to 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 seized crime in the is believed to have something to do with heroin, or the other accused is N..it is inappropriate to decide on the defendant’s conviction instead of acquittal, provided that there is insufficient and conclusive evidence that he participated in the crime, which exceeds the limits of suspicion.
(5237 P. K. m. 188)
Case and Decision: The appeal review was held on a trial basis about the defendants at the request of the defense counsel.
The file has been reviewed.
It was Discussed and Considered as Necessary:
A) Defendant N.. examination of the sentence of conviction against:
Made in the trial process of transactions in accordance with the law, where it is shown in the reasoned decision of the evidence are discussed, the action is performed by the defendant determined that certain documents and data in the file conscientious of blood in accordance with the information on which it is based, the action is determined that fits with the type of crime in the correct manner, it is understood that sanctions; appeals appeals counsel in the proceedings in the place of the defendant that are not seen with the rejection of the defence, the provision approved by the amount of the penalty awarded and during the inmate’s stay, according to the defendant’s denial of the request for release,
B) Defendant A.. examination of the sentence of conviction against:
According to the content of the incident report, the live diagnosis report dated 07.11.2015 and the defendant N..CD images of the same date related to the live diagnosis of Ö, which were investigated separately for the crime of “possession of drugs to 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 seized crime in the is believed to have something to do with heroin, or the other accused is N..decision on the conviction of the accused instead of acquittal, without taking into account that there is insufficient and conclusive evidence that he participated in the crime, exceeding the limits of suspicion,
In violation of the law, the defendant appeals Appeals is in place because the defence counsel in the Proceedings, therefore, the provision of deterioration, cause destruction, according to the defendant to be released, or imprisoned convicted of other crimes released without the relevant public prosecutor’s office to ensure that the article to be written, it was decided unanimously on 30.06.2016.
