Theft: 6th Criminal Chamber 2021/4615 E. , 2021/20559 K.
“Case Law Text”
COURT :Criminal Court of First Instance
CHILD DRAGGED INTO CRIME : …
CRIME : Theft
CONVICTION : Conviction
The judgement given by the local court was appealed, the file was examined and the necessity was considered:
In the face of the understanding that the decision on the deferment of the announcement of the verdict was finalised on 24.07.2009, and that the crime subject to the file of the … 7th Criminal Court of First Instance, which caused the announcement of the verdict, was committed on 10.07.2014, although it is stated in the decision that the child dragged into crime is subject to a 5-year supervision period, in accordance with Article 23 of the Child Protection Law, the supervision period for the child dragged into crime is 3 years and therefore the verdict cannot be announced.
In accordance with Article 23 of the Child Protection Law, the supervision period for the child dragged into crime is 3 years, therefore the verdict cannot be announced; When the current criminal record of the child dragged into crime is examined, it is determined that the crime subject to the conviction numbered 2011/192 Esas, 2013/74 Decision given by the 2nd Juvenile Assize Court on 16/07/2011 within the 3-year supervision period belongs to the crime of sexual abuse of children defined in Articles 103/1-b, 103/2 of the TPC numbered 5237 and that the conditions for the announcement of the decision deferred to be announced have occurred,
.
Considering that the 6-year extraordinary statute of limitations of action, calculated in accordance with Articles 66/1-e, 66/2 and 67/4 of the TCC according to the upper limit of the penalty stipulated in Articles 141/1, 31/2 of the TCC, which corresponds to the act of the child dragged into the crime of theft, stopped as of 24.07.2009, when the decision to defer the announcement of the verdict became final, and that the child dragged into the crime started to commit the crime again on 16.07.2011, when the crime was committed within the supervision period, it has passed from the date of the crime on 20.03.2008 until the date of examination,
Since it required to be reversed and the appeal objection of the Public Prosecutor of that place was deemed appropriate in this respect, it was unanimously decided on 29/12/2021, based on the authority granted by Article 322 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 1412, which is still in force pursuant to Article 8 of the Law No. 5320, that the public case against the child dragged into crime shall be DISMISSED due to statute of limitations pursuant to Article 223/8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure No. 5271, since the reason for reversal does not require a retrial.
You can access our other article examples and petition examples by clicking here.