EN SUPREME COURT
Criminal Department
Based on: 2016/238
Verdict: 2016/15323
Decision Date: 30.06.2016
INJURY OFFENSE – THE SENTENCE AGAINST THE ACCUSED HAS BEEN INCREASED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE TCK, AND THE RESULT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY CORRECTING THE SENTENCE.
SUMMARY:
In the judgment given against the accused, 86/3 of the TCK.while the increase was made according to article e, the sentence had to be corrected and approved because the resulting sentence was calculated as “2 years and 3 months in prison” instead of “1 year and 15 months in prison”.
(5237 SK md. 53, 86) (5271 SK md. 221) (ANY. MAH. 08.10.2015 T. 2014/140 E. 2015/85 K.)
Case and Decision: By applying for an appeal against the decision of the local court, by reading the document;
Discussed and evaluated:
Although the 53rd of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237. although some phrases in the article were canceled by the Constitutional Court’s decision dated 08.10.2015 dated 2014/140 and numbered 2015/85 published in the Official Gazette dated 24.11.2015 and numbered 29542, the reason for cancellation was not put forward because it was thought that this issue could be taken into account at the execution stage.
1) In the examination of the appeals made against the verdict of intentionally injuring the participant…
APPROVAL of the judgment given upon request, according to the trial procedure, the evidence collected and disclosed at the place of decision, the opinion and discretion of the court as a result of the prosecution, the reason shown and the application, together with the rejection of the defendant’s objections that were not present at the place,
2) In the examination of the appeals made against the judgment established due to the crime of intentionally injuring the participant…;
Rejection of other objections that are not considered appropriate;
a) In the judgment established against the accused, 86/3 of the Turkish Penal Code.while the penalty was increased in accordance with article e, it was ensured that the resulting penalty was calculated as “2 years and 3 months in prison” instead of “1 year and 15 months in prison”.
b) .. incorrect spelling of your name
Conclusion: It required to be overturned, and since the defendant’s appeals were also considered on the spot in this direction, therefore, 8/1 of Law No. 5320. the judgment is established in the article. 321 of CMUK No. 1412. in accordance with Article 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. in accordance with the article, upon request; the phrase was removed and the phrase “1 year 15 months” was added instead; the client …., has fulfilled the crime of intentionally wounding with a rotary knife, which is considered a counter weapon, in a way that cannot be remedied by simple medical intervention; on 30.06.2016 “…