scholarly journals Subject and limits of examination evidence in the proceedings of the criminal case in the court of first instance

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 186-195
Author(s):  
Ilya N. Yefimovykh
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Court Of First Instance ◽  
Special Order

The article analyzes the norms of the criminal procedure law, the opinions of scientists, judicial practice materials related to the examination of evidence in criminal proceedings in the court of first instance, on the basis of which the author proposed definitions of the notions subject of examination evidence and limits of examination evidence they were compared with the concepts of subject of proof and limits of proof. The study used such research methods as logical, system-structural, statistical. As a result of a study of specific court decisions in criminal cases, differences in the understanding of evidence and the examination of evidence were revealed. A distinction has been made between the subject and the object of the study of evidence at the court hearing. The question of determining the subject matter and the limits of the examination of evidence was analyzed, including with regard to the consideration of the criminal case in a special order of judicial decision of the court, with the consent of the accused with the accusation. The rationale for the view that the examination of evidence takes place during the examination of a criminal case under a special court procedure is given, the circumstances that can be established during the court session, namely, the circumstances that may lead to exemption from punishment, as well as the postponement are analyzed. serving the sentence. These circumstances, if any, are mandatory to be established in court proceedings through the examination of evidence. According to the results of the analysis, proposed measures to improve the norms of the criminal procedure law governing the consideration of the criminal case in a special order of the trial. The question of the scope of the examination of evidence was considered in conjunction with the norms of the criminal procedure law, which established the grounds for the return of the criminal case to the prosecutor.

On the Consideration of a Criminal Case Against a Minor by Jury

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 90-96
Author(s):  
E. V. Markovicheva ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Case ◽  
Jury Trial ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Scientific Discussion ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Right ◽  
A Minor

The functioning of the jury in Russia has demonstrated not only effectiveness, but also a number of problems that need to be resolved. Such problems include the personal jurisdiction of criminal cases by jury. The article reveals the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation regarding the right of minors to trial a criminal case in a jury. The approaches to solving this issue that have developed in the judicial practice of individual foreign states are analyzed, the main directions for further scientific discussion regarding the right of minors to a jury trial are outlined. The purpose of the article is to disclose various approaches to the administration of criminal justice in the relations of minors with the participation of lay judges. The theoretical basis of the study was Russian and foreign scientific works in the field of criminal procedure law, devoted both to the consideration of criminal cases with the jury, and the specifics of juvenile criminal proceedings. Using the comparative legal research method has allowed to reveal various approaches to the access of minors to jury trials in individual states. In Russian legislation and judicial practice the question of the right of minors to have a criminal case against them considered by a jury remains unresolved. The position of the Constitutional Court of Russia regarding the jurisdiction of such criminal cases is also controversial. The experience of foreign countries indicates that there is no universal way to ensure the right of a minor to a proper court. This issue is decided depending on the type of criminal process, the presence or absence of specialized juvenile courts. Any direct borrowing in this regard cannot be considered effective, but a generalization of foreign experience can create the necessary basis for optimizing both the work of the jury and criminal proceedings against minors.

scholarly journals INTERROGATION OF THE VICTIM, THE WITNESS UNDER A PSEUDONYM IN PRE-JUDICIAL AND JUDICIAL PRODUCTIONS (CRIMINAL PROCEDURE AND CRIMINALISTIC ASPECTS)

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 480-486
Author(s):  
A.Yu. Epikhin ◽  
A.V. Mishin
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Current State ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Practical Recommendations

Ensuring the safety of victims, witnesses in a criminal case allows to carry out the main objectives of criminal prosecution. Interrogation as one of the main investigative actions allows to record important information of evidentiary nature in the case. Currently, there is a sufficient number of proven forensic recommendations for tactics of interrogation of the victim, the witness in pre-judicial production. At the same time, interrogation of such participants of criminal proceedings under a pseudonym in preliminary investigation and, especially in court session, in terms of criminalistics is poorly studied. The article discusses problematic issues of the current state of the organization and tactics of interrogation under a pseudonym of the protected person in pre-judicial and judicial criminal case productions. The authors have proposed variable tactical solutions on production of interrogation of this type, practical recommendations for the persons conducting proceedings, as well as formulated proposals aimed at improving the effectiveness of the law enforcement of the criminal procedure law. The data of generalization of investigatory and judicial practice in the Republic of Tatarstan have been used.

Criminal Procedural and Criminalistic Characteristics of the Circumstances to be Proved and Established (Detected)

2019 ◽  
pp. 61-65
Author(s):  
Leonid Drapkin ◽  
Aleksandr Shuklin
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Essential Difference ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Information Availability ◽  
The Core ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article describes the main features of the two divergent processes: proof (part 1 of Article 73 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation) and establishment (identification) (part 2 of Article 73 of the Criminal Procedure Code. They are considered both in terms of the criminal procedure law, and their forensic significance in detection and investigation of crimes. An attempt is made to differentiate them depending on the information availability and importance for the criminal case. The essential difference between these two processes is emphasized. The authors pay special attention to the concept of the subject of proof as the core of part 1 of Article 73. Article 74 of the Code which provide for the establishment of so-called other circumstances significant for investigation of crimes is also considered. The additional circumstances (Article 421 of the Criminal Procedure Code) to be established in criminal cases of minors are covered, as well as the circumstances to be proved in order to use compulsory medical measures (part 2 of Article 434 of the Criminal Procedure Code). The article presents a real example of proof in a criminal case in phases. It is concluded that the number of these phases depends on the method of proving a particular circumstance; due to this, the theoretical provisions are confirmed.

Problems of Substantive Differentiation Conditions of Criminal Proceedings

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (9) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Александра Боярская ◽  
Aleksandra Boyarskaya
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Special Order

The article discusses current issues of differentiation of criminal proceedings. The character of the impact of criminal law on procedural form of summary court proceedings. The author successively examines the substantive basis of summary court proceedings of Russian criminal trial: a special order of the trial, a special procedure for the trial at the conclusion of the pre-trial agreement, judicial procedure under Art. 226.9 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as well as in criminal cases of private prosecution. The author concludes that the specific substantive basis is not peculiar to each of these procedures. Legislators did not specify the substantive grounds of procedure under Sec. 40.1 Code of Criminal Procedure. The court proceedings under Art. 226.9 CPC RF does not have its own substantive basis. The article concludes that all above said demonstrates the destruction of classical chords, according to which the differentiation of criminal law determines the differentiation of criminal procedural law in sphere of differentiation of criminal procedural form. Nowadays, on the contrary, the differentiation of the criminal procedure is carried out more rapidly and dictates the transformation of criminal procedural law. The article also analyzes the causes and symptoms of this trend of development of modern legislation.

CONCEPT AND CONTENT OF A RECONCILIATION AGREEMENT IN THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF UKRAINE

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariia Sirotkina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Main Attention ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Definition Of

The article is turned out to a scientific search for the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or accused" through the study of the essence of reconciliation and role in criminal proceedings thereof. The author notes that criminal procedural law (until 2012) had been proclaimed another approach to reconciliation between victim and suspect, not involved a dispute procedure as a conflict, the result of which can be reached by compromise and understanding through reconciliation. It is stated that one of the ways to resolve the legal conflict in committing a criminal offense was the opportunity to reach a compromise between the victim and the suspect (the accused) by concluding a reconciliation agreement between them, provided by the Code of Сriminal Procedure of Ukraine (2012). The main attention is placed on the shortcoming of the domestic criminal procedure law which is the lack of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement between the victim and the suspect or the accused", which can be eliminated only through examining the essence or legal nature of reconciliation in criminal proceedings. Taking into consideration the current legislation and modern views on the institution of reconciliation in criminal proceedings, the author's definition of the concept of "a reconciliation agreement" is proposed. Thus, “The conciliation agreement is an agreement in criminal proceedings concluded between the victim and the suspect or the accused person on their own initiative in relation to crimes of minor or medium gravity and in criminal proceedings in the form of private prosecution, the subject of which is the compensation of harm caused by wrongdoing or committing other actions not related to compensation for the damage that the suspect or the accused is obliged to commit in favor of the victim, in exchange for an agreed punishment and sentencing thereof or sentencing thereof and relief from serving a sentence with probation, as well as the statutory consequences of conclusion and approval of the agreement".

To the Matter of Procedural and Legal Problems of Detaining a Person on Suspicion of Committing a Crime

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
E.V. Bolshakov ◽  
◽  
I.D. Nazarov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Moment

The subject of the research within the framework of the article is the criminal procedure institute for the detention of a person on suspicion of committing a crime. The legal nature of this institution is analyzed, and comments are given on the normative legal acts and judicial practice regulating the issues of detention. The theoretical basis of the research is based on the publications of the last two decades on this problem, in particular, reflecting the discussion of the process scientists S. A. Shafer, S. B. Rossinsky and A. A. Tarasov, the subject of which was the issue of the legal nature of a suspect detention in a criminal case. In the paper, the authors ask the following questions: What is the detention of a person on suspicion of committing a crime in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation? From what moment does the detained person acquire the status of a suspect? Is it possible to detain a person before initiating a criminal case? The study concludes that a person acquires the actual status of a suspect from the moment of direct detention, that is, before documenting this status and, as a result, before initiating a criminal case. Amendments to the articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation are proposed, and the authors` versions of the definitions of the concepts «detention of a suspect», «the moment of actual detention» and «pre-trial proceedings» are given.

scholarly journals ANALYSIS OF TYPICAL ERRONEOUS DECISIONS OF THE COURT WHEN THE SENTENCE

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 117-122
Author(s):  
E.V. Bykadorova ◽  
◽  
N.V. Manilkin ◽  
N.V. Boldyrev ◽  
◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Final Part ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Crime Statistics ◽  
Guilty Verdict ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Court Of First Instance

The article analyzes the judicial practice, statistics and typical errors that arise when passing a sentence by a court of first instance, which led to the acquittal of a person who committed a crime; statistics of consideration of criminal cases by the courts of first instance; criteria for sentencing by the courts of first instance; analyzes the stages of the trial; examines the main points of correction of pre-trial proceedings in a criminal case; considers the list of grounds for ruling an acquittal; the structure and content of the sentence, the moment of absence of defense arguments in the sentence – by the appeal and cassation courts; the stages of cassation; the grounds for a guilty verdict; the procedural function of the court and the function of resolving a criminal case; the analysis in the final part of the article.

scholarly journals The use of digital communication technologies in the context of a pandemic as a way to improve the effectiveness of justice

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-101
Author(s):  
E. V. Smakhtin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article deals with the peculiarities of the activity of courts in making judicial decisions in the context of a pandemic. First of all, we are talking about the wider use of digital and information technologies in criminal proceedings, which have previously been repeatedly recommended by forensic science for implementation in judicial practice. Some recommendations of criminalistics are currently accepted by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in its Decision dated April 08, 2020 № 821 and Review on certain issues of judicial practice related to the application of legislation and measures to counteract the spread of a new coronavirus infection (COVID-19) in the territory of the Russian Federation № 2, which provided appropriate explanations for their use in practice. In particular, we are talking about the possibility of using video conferencing systems for certain categories of criminal cases and materials that are considered urgent, although this is not provided for in criminal procedure legislation. It is concluded that it is necessary to change the current criminal procedure legislation, bring it into line with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal constitutional laws, federal laws and subordinate regulatory legal acts, including orders of the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Prohibition of interrogation of notaries as witnesses in criminal proceedings

1970 ◽  
pp. 345-349
Author(s):  
Ulyana Polyak
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
Notary Public ◽  
Made In

The current criminal procedure law of Ukraine stipulates that a witness is obliged to give a true testimony during pre-trial investigation and trial, however, the legislator made an exception for this by specifying the categories of persons who have been granted immunity from immunity, ie they are released by law. testify. The article deals with the problems of law and practice regarding the prohibition of the interrogation of a notary as a witness in criminal proceedings and the release of him from the obligation to keep the notarial secret by the person who entrusted him with the information which is the subject of this secret. The notion of notarial secrecy is proposed to be changed, since the subject of this secrecy is not only information that became known to the notary public from the interested person, but also those information that the notary received from other sources in the performance of their professional duties, as well as the procedural activity of the notary himself, is aimed at achieving a certain legal result. The proposal made in the legal literature to supplement the CPC of Ukraine with the provisions that a notary is subject to interrogation as a witness on information that constitutes a notarial secret, if the notarial acts were declared illegal in accordance with the procedure established by law The proposal to increase the list of persons who are not subject to interrogation as witnesses about the information constituting a notarial secret is substantiated, this clause is proposed to be supplemented by provisions that, apart from the notary, are not notarized, other notarials, notaries as well as the persons mentioned in Part 3 of Art. 8 of the Law of Ukraine "On Notary". Amendments to the current CPC of Ukraine by the amendments proposed in this publication will significantly improve the law prohibiting the interrogation of a notary as a witness in criminal proceedings, as well as improve certain theoretical provisions of the institute of witness immunity in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals FEATURES OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PRINCIPLE OF PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS OF PRIVATE PROSECUTION

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 875-880
Author(s):  
E.F. Tensina
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Procedural Rights

The article reveals the nature of the claim of a private prosecution, which establishes the freedom to dispose of material and procedural rights. The forms of manifestation of dispositive principles in the material and procedural aspects in the course of criminal proceedings are determined. Taking into account the nature of the claim of a private prosecution, various models of proceedings in criminal cases of a private prosecution and the peculiarities of the implementation of the provisions of the criminal procedure principle of the presumption of innocence are considered. The author critically assesses the legal constructions that allow the application of a special procedure for making a court decision in criminal proceedings of a private prosecution if the accused agrees with the charge brought. In particular, taking into account the provisions of the principle of the presumption of innocence, it is concluded that it is inadmissible to apply Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation when considering a criminal case of a private prosecution if it is initiated by filing an application directly with a magistrate in the manner prescribed by Art. 318 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation or when investigating a criminal case of this category in the form of an abbreviated inquiry, regulated by Ch. 32.1 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document