The verdict sentencing Bojić to three years in prison has been upheld.

After a panel session, the Court of Appeals issued a verdict rejecting as unfounded the appeals of the Higher State Prosecutor's Office in Podgorica and the defense attorney of the accused Ilija Bojić, filed against the verdict of the Higher Court in Podgorica of May 19.

Bojić was found guilty of attempted aggravated murder by the Higher Court and sentenced to three years in prison, with credit for the time he spent in custody.

In the opinion of the Court of Appeal, the first-instance verdict does not contain any significant violations of the provisions of criminal procedure pointed out in the appeal by the defendant's defense attorney, nor any other violations that this court, as a second-instance court, is responsible for ex officio.

"Based on the presented evidence and its proper assessment, as well as the proper assessment of the accused's defense and the findings of this court, it has been undoubtedly established that on February 16, 2024, near the 'Vaso Aligrudić' Military Training Center in Podgorica, the accused intentionally attempted to deprive several persons of their lives, including the injured parties VM and JB, by brandishing a knife during a fight with the injured parties and stabbing them with it, causing them serious, life-threatening bodily injuries," the statement reads.

The Court of Appeals examined the contested verdict in the part of the decision on the sentence, and found that the prosecution's allegations in the appeal that the first instance court overestimated the mitigating circumstances were unfounded. It found that the circumstances in question were those prescribed by the Criminal Code and that the first instance court correctly assessed as mitigating, giving them the character of particularly mitigating circumstances.

"The Court of Appeal finds the prosecutor's appeals unfounded and states that the first instance court should have assessed as aggravating the circumstances referred to when explaining why it does not accept the defense's position that the accused acted in self-defense. It is precisely these circumstances, in the opinion of this court, that indicate that the injured parties, with a group of people, with balaclavas and hoods on their heads, with wooden and metal clubs and torches in their hands, came to physically confront the accused and the group he was in, during which the accused himself sustained injuries," the statement reads.

The November 11 verdict will be published on the Court of Appeals' website.