Criminal Law

In individually committed offenses, custody may not exceed 24 hours from the moment of apprehension, excluding the time necessarily required to bring the person before the nearest judge or court (CMK Art. 91). In collectively committed offenses, the public prosecutor may extend this period by written order — each extension not exceeding one day — for up to 3 additional days; in that case, the total period can reach 4 days.

Yes. The apprehended person, defense counsel, or relatives may apply to the criminal judgeship of peace against the decision to take the person into custody or to extend the custody period. The judge must examine the application on the file and decide immediately, and in any event within 24 hours at the latest (CMK Art. 91/5).

Pre-trial detention requires that concrete evidence demonstrating strong suspicion of the offense coexist with one of the detention grounds listed in CMK Art. 100 (risk of flight, an attempt to tamper with evidence, or strong suspicion of one of the specific serious offense categories listed in the law); a detention order cannot be issued if it is disproportionate to the significance of the matter. Detention cannot be ordered for offenses punishable only by a judicial fine or by imprisonment with an upper limit not exceeding two years (except intentional offenses against bodily integrity).

In total (investigation + prosecution), detention may last at most 1 year in matters outside the jurisdiction of the assize courts (extendable by 6 months with reasoning); in matters within assize court jurisdiction it is at most 2 years and, with reasoned extensions, may not exceed 3 years in total, or 5 years in certain serious offense categories and terrorism offenses (CMK Art. 102). For the investigation phase alone, separate and shorter upper limits apply: at most 6 months in matters outside assize jurisdiction, and at most 1 year in matters within it (up to 1 year 6 months in certain serious offenses, terrorism offenses, and collectively committed offenses, with a reasoned 6-month extension). These periods are statutory UPPER limits; in practice, the court must review of its own motion, at regular intervals (including before the upper limit is reached), whether judicial control would suffice — so in most files detention ends before the upper limit. If the trial has not concluded despite the upper limit being reached, the defendant is, as a rule, released and the case continues under judicial control measures; this does not mean the case is dismissed. Time actually spent in detention is deducted from the sentence to be executed in the event of conviction.

Yes. Where no other period is prescribed by law, an objection to a detention order may be filed under CMK Art. 268 within two weeks of the date the decision was learned of. At every detention review, it can also be argued that judicial control measures would suffice; an effective objection petition must be supported by concrete evidence.

HAGB is a mechanism that may be applied to prison sentences of 2 years or less or judicial fines, on the conditions that the defendant has no prior conviction for an intentional offense, the harm has been remedied, and the court finds that the defendant will not reoffend (CMK Art. 231). If ordered, the defendant is placed under a 5-year supervision period running from the finality of the ruling; if this period passes without a new intentional offense, the case is dismissed.

Only in offenses whose prosecution depends on a complaint (simple injury, defamation, threats, and the like) does withdrawing the complaint end the case. In offenses investigated ex officio, withdrawal does not end the case, though it may affect the sentence by way of reduction. In complaint-dependent offenses, the right to complain must be exercised within 6 months of learning of the act and the perpetrator (TCK Art. 73).

Simple theft (TCK Art. 141) is taking another's movable property without the possessor's consent and requires 1 to 3 years of imprisonment. In practice, however, most files are opened as aggravated theft (TCK Art. 142): circumstances such as breaking a lock or stealing from locked premises, the property being located in a workplace, place of worship, or public institution, or commission at night significantly raise both the lower and upper sentence limits — which is why the aggravating circumstance cited in the indictment is the starting point of the defense strategy. The low value of the property (TCK Art. 145) can be a ground for a sentence reduction or for refraining from imposing a sentence, while institutions such as theft of use (TCK Art. 146) and necessity are assessed on the specific facts. Where the offense is committed between relatives, the personal impunity or complaint-dependence provisions (TCK Art. 167) may come into play. Remedying the loss during the investigation under effective remorse (TCK Art. 168) provides a substantial sentence reduction. Since each aggravating circumstance must be proven separately, scrutiny of camera footage and technical evidence is decisive in these files.

Fraud (TCK Art. 157) is an offense punishing deceiving a person through deceptive conduct and obtaining an unjust benefit, with 1-5 years of imprisonment and a judicial fine. Breach of contract or non-payment of a debt does not by itself constitute fraud; the element of deception must be established with concrete evidence, and drawing this distinction correctly is decisive for both the complainant and the suspect.

No. Where the effect of the intentional injury is minor enough to be remedied by simple medical intervention (TCK Art. 86/2), prosecution depends on a complaint. However, in aggravated forms (TCK Art. 86/3) — such as commission against a spouse, ascendants or descendants, with a weapon, or against a public official — the offense is investigated ex officio without a complaint and the sentence is increased by half.

Yes, the two are subject to entirely different regimes. Trading acts such as selling, possessing, or transporting narcotics (TCK Art. 188) require at least 10 years of imprisonment, whereas possession solely for personal use is subject to a separate and lighter provision (TCK Art. 191). Establishing this distinction correctly in the file determines the direction of the defense.

Judicial control aims to secure the integrity of the proceedings without depriving the suspect/defendant of liberty, through measures such as a ban on leaving the country, an obligation to report and sign at regular intervals, or a ban on visiting certain places. It is a far lighter measure than detention; even where detention grounds exist, courts are obliged to assess whether judicial control would suffice.

It is not mandatory, but it is recommended. Counsel for the victim/complainant strengthens the process regarding access to the investigation file, requesting the collection of evidence, joining the public prosecution as an intervening party, and pursuing pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages claims; early contact is particularly important in files involving complaint deadlines and the risk of evidence loss.

The deletion of a criminal record and its conversion into an archive record is a separate execution-law process that varies according to the type of conviction, the date the sentence was completed, and whether a new offense has been committed. To establish the current position and, if needed, request deletion of the archive record, reviewing the file with a lawyer is recommended.

The assize (heavy penal) court hears only the limited offenses enumerated in the law: robbery, extortion by a public officer, aggravated forgery of official documents, fraudulent bankruptcy, certain offenses against state security and the constitutional order, and offenses requiring aggravated life imprisonment, life imprisonment, or more than ten years of imprisonment (Law No. 5235, Art. 12). Offenses outside these — theft, fraud, simple injury, and the like — are heard by the criminal court of first instance.

The procedure changed with the Law No. 7499 amendment in 2024: the period now runs not from the day the judgment is announced but from the date the reasoned judgment is served on the parties, and it is two weeks for both remedies (CMK Arts. 273, 291). The cassation route is additionally subject to an amount threshold; prison sentences of five years or less cannot, as a rule, be taken to the Court of Cassation (CMK Art. 286/2), while for certain offenses the cassation route is open regardless of this threshold (CMK Art. 286/3).

No. Under CMK Art. 217/2, an offense may be proven only with lawfully obtained evidence; evidence obtained by unlawful means — an irregular search, interception without consent, or a statement taken without the statutory reminders of rights — cannot form the basis of a conviction. When such a procedural defect is identified, having this evidence excluded from the file should be the defense's priority.

Yes, if the conditions are met. Under TCK Art. 51, prison sentences of two years or less (up to three years for certain age groups) may be suspended, provided the defendant has no prior conviction for an intentional offense exceeding three months and the court forms the view that the defendant will not reoffend. In addition, short-term prison sentences may be converted under TCK Art. 50 to a judicial fine or to alternative sanctions such as community service.