Realization Of The Six-Year Statute Of Limitations For Original Trial Based On The Amount Of The Penalty Required By The Crime – Dismissal Of The Public Prosecution
T.C. JUDICIARY
15th Criminal Chamber
Main: 2015/10838
Decision: 2016/6627
Date of Decision: 22.06.2016
OFFENSE OF DAMAGING PUBLIC PROPERTY – THE SIX-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR THE ORIGINAL CASE HAS EXPIRED DUE TO THE AMOUNT OF THE PENALTY REQUIRED BY THE OFFENSE – DISMISSAL OF THE PUBLIC CASE
SUMMARY: Since it is understood that the six-year statute of limitations for the original lawsuit in terms of the amount and type of the punishment required by the crime imposed on the child dragged into crime has been realized from the date of the crime until the date of the decision, it has been decided to dismiss the public case due to the statute of limitations.
(5237 S. Code Art. 66, 67, 125, 151, 152, 265)
Case and Decision: The conviction of the child dragged into crime for the crimes of insult, resisting a public officer to prevent him from performing his duty and damaging public property was appealed by the defense counsel of the child dragged into crime, the file was examined and the necessity was considered,
1- In the appellate review regarding the decisions given for the crimes of insult and resisting a public officer to prevent him from performing his duty;
According to Article 231/12 of the same law against the decision on “deferring the announcement of the verdict”, which is given according to Article 231 of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271 and which is not conclusive in the case, the way of appeal is open according to Article 231/12 of the same law and there is no possibility of appeal, upon the objection made by the defense counsel of the child dragged into crime against the decision on deferring the announcement of the verdict given on 04/07/2013 about the child dragged into crime, with the petition dated 11.07.2013, ….. Since it is understood that the decision given with the rejection decision made by the Assize Court as a result of the examination made by the Assize Court has become final, the appeal request of the defense counsel of the child dragged into crime is rejected in accordance with Article 317 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 1412, which must be applied in accordance with Article 8/1 of the Law No. 5320,
2- In the appellate review regarding the verdict given for the offense of damaging public property;
Conclusion It is understood that the 6-year statute of limitations for the original case, calculated according to Article 152/1-a amended by the Law No. 6545 and Articles 66/1-e, 66/2 and 67/4 of the same law, to which the child dragged into the crime, who has completed the age of 12 and has not completed the age of 15 as of the date of the crime, is subject to in terms of the amount and type of the punishment required by the crime imposed on the child dragged into the crime, has been realized from the date of the crime until the date of the decision; and the judgment is reversed in accordance with Article 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 1412, which must be applied in accordance with Article 8/1 of the Law No. 5320. Article 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 1412, which should be applied in accordance with Article 8/1 of the Law No. 5320, but since this issue does not require a retrial, based on the authority granted by Article 322 of the same law, it was unanimously decided on 22.06.2016 to dismiss the public case filed for the crime of damaging public property in accordance with Article 223/8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271 due to the statute of limitations.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking here.