Objective: Forensic reports are an important step in the healthy progress of the litigation process. This study, it is aimed to determine the appearance of forensic reports in the decisions of the Supreme Court and the deficiencies in the reports prepared by forensic medicine experts. Materials-methods: The decisions reached in the search with the words "Forensic medicine Specialist " on the Supreme Court decision search site were scanned. Decisions about the reports prepared within the scope of injury crimes defined in the Turkish Penal Code were examined. Results: Eight decisions did not express an opinion on simple medical intervention, In 10 decisions, on the grounds that there was a temporary physician report or a final report was not received from the relevant department, on the grounds that the bone fracture was not graded or the number of degrees was not given in 9 decisions, on the grounds that there were conflicts between the reports or the content of the report in 31 decisions, on the grounds that there was no evaluation of fixed scars on the facial borders in 21 decisions, It was seen that a decision was made to get a report again on the grounds of determining whether each injury individually poses a life-threatening danger in the report stating that there is more than one definite decision in the life-threatening situation in seven decisions. Conclusion: It was concluded that directing the forensic medicine experts and taking opinions in other branches in the preparation of the final report would contribute to making sound decisions.