R v Kilincer (No. 8) [2022] NSWSC 1735

R v Kilincer (No. 8) [2022] NSWSC 1735

The application to adjourn the trial was refused because the medical evidence provided by Dr Mok, a junior doctor without cardiological expertise, did not sufficiently certify or specify the accused's unfitness to testify. The imminent cardiological review and the advanced stage of the trial were also considered.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Kubilay Kilincer
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 August 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Application to Adjourn Trial
Outcome
Application to adjourn the trial is refused.
Legal Topics
Adjournment of Trial, Murder Trial, Ill Health of Accused
Criminal Law Adjournment of Trial Murder Trial Ill Health of Accused

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Kubilay Kilincer

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Application to Adjourn Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial should be adjourned due to the accused's alleged ill health

Ratio Decidendi

The application to adjourn the trial was refused because the medical evidence provided by Dr Mok, a junior doctor without cardiological expertise, did not sufficiently certify or specify the accused's unfitness to testify. The imminent cardiological review and the advanced stage of the trial were also considered.

Court Disposition

Application to adjourn the trial is refused.

Orders

  • Application to adjourn the trial is refused.