An appellant said in his grounds of appeal that the appealed ruling by which he was convicted of accidental killing had erred in the application of law and had insufficient evidence of causation. He said that the court had failed to indicate the evidence on the grounds of which it concluded that the criminal intention existed.

The court of cassation said that this argument was invalid. The court said that the court considered all aspects of the incident and concluded that the elements of the crime existed in the case. The court said that the documents of the case revealed that the appellant had beat the victim and failed to provide her the with medical care which resulted in her death. The court said that the appellant's defence that the criminal intention did not exist was irrelevant. The court said that the court established its ruling on the grounds of solid evidence including the testimonies of the witnesses and the report of the coroner.

The court dismissed the appeal.