The file was examined and the need was considered:
1- Regarding the decision on the substantive rejection of the appeal against the accused, Atty. In the examination of …’s appeal;
The decision made in the absence of the accused, Atty. Even though it has been notified to … and appealed by the named lawyer in the capacity of the defendant’s counsel; The defendant and his attorney, Atty. … were present together at the hearing dated 24/11/2017 at the court of first instance and Atty. As it is understood that the duty of … has come to an end, Atty. REJECT the appeal of … pursuant to Article 298 of the Criminal Procedure Law No. 5271,
2- In the examination of the defendant’s appeal against the decision regarding the rejection on the merits of the appeal against the defendant for the crime of violation of the immunity of residence;
Considering the amount and type of the sentenced penalties, appeal of the decisions of the regional court of appeal regarding the substantive refusal of the appeal application regarding the five years or less prison sentences given by the courts of first instance and the judicial fines regardless of the amount, pursuant to Article 286/2-a of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271 Since it is not possible, the defendant’s appeal request is REJECTED as per Article 298 of the Criminal Procedure Law No. 5271,
3- In the examination of the defendant’s appeal against the decision regarding the rejection on the merits of the appeal against the accused for theft crime;
Article 288 of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271 states that “The appeal is based on the fact that the provision is unlawful. Failure to apply or misapply a rule of law is against the law.” and article 294 of the same Law; “The appellant has to show in the appeal the reason why he wants the judgment to be reversed. The reason for the appeal can only be related to the legal aspect of the judgment.” In the examination made limited to the aforementioned reason, it was determined that the defendant’s appeal request was directed to the restriction of the right to defense by acting in violation of the 193rd and 196th articles of the Criminal Procedure Code;
While the deprivation of rights envisaged in Article 53 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 is being implemented, at the execution stage of the amendment made to Article 53 of the Turkish Penal Code with Article 10 of the Law No. 7242, which was published in the Official Gazette dated 15/04/2020 and numbered 31100. observed was possible.
As it was understood that there was no wrongdoing in the decision regarding the rejection on the merits of the appeal against the accused for theft crime, since the decision made about the accused was found to be in accordance with the law, the objections of the accused that were not found on the spot were rejected, the Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271, 302/1. It was unanimously decided on 10/01/2022 that the APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION APPLICATION against the decision of the 8th Penal Chamber of the Istanbul Regional Court of Justice, which was in accordance with the procedure and law, was substantively rejected.
You can reach our other article samples and petition samples by clicking here.
