scholarly journals THE USE OF POLYGRAPH TESTING RESULTS IN CRIMINAL CASE PROVING

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 8-12
Author(s):  
Vladimir V. Semenov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Polygraph Testing

The article analyzes the practice of application of psycho-physiological polygraph examinations and testing in proving on various stages of criminal proceedings (on the example of operations of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation). Two procedural forms of such testing have emerged the expert’s report and the specialist’s report. The author notes the difficulties arising during the evaluation of such evidence by a court. The number of cases when reports of polygraph examiners are treated as evidence reduces. At the same time, polygraph is frequently used on criminal case initiation and pre-trial examination stages, and not only for the tactical purposes, but also in the process of proving.

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.

scholarly journals Meaning of the Category “Validity of the Charge” in Criminal Proceedings

2021 ◽  
pp. 218-223
Author(s):  
Oksana V. Kachalova ◽  
◽  
Viкtor I. Kachalov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Sufficient Evidence ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Simplified Procedure ◽  
Special Order

The aim of the article is to identify the meaning of the category “validity of the charge” in criminal proceedings and the scope of its application. After analyzing the content and legal essence of this category, as well as procedural situations in which it is necessary to establish the validity of the charge, the authors come to the following conclusions. Any coercive measures against suspects and accused persons can be applied only if there are serious grounds to assume that a person is involved in the commission of a crime since the restriction of the most important constitutional rights of citizens who, by virtue of the presumption of innocence, are innocent of committing a crime is possible only in exceptional cases. The validity of the charge (suspicion) assumes that a person is involved in the commission of a crime, as well as the fact of the criminal prosecution of this person. It is established if there is sufficient evidence that a person may have committed a crime (a person was caught committing a crime or immediately after it was committed; the victim or witnesses identified the person as the perpetrator of the crime; obvious traces of the crime were found on the person or their clothing, with them or in their house, etc.). The validity of the charge may be confirmed by a decision to initiate a criminal case and bring a person as an accused, by protocols of detention, interrogations of the accused, the victim, witnesses, and other materials. In the procedural sense, the conditions for establishing the validity of the charge differ significantly. When resolving the issue of the use of detention and other preventive measures, the validity of the charge is established within the framework of a court session in the conditions of adversariality with the participation of the parties. When giving the court permission to conduct investigative and other procedural actions in accordance with Article 165 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, to ensure the secrecy of the investigation, the issue is resolved in the absence of adversariality with the possible participation of only the prosecutor, the investigator, and the inquirer. The category “validity of the charge” is significant in legal terms in a criminal case with the special order of proceedings. A prerequisite for the court to consider a criminal case in a simplified procedure is the validity of the charge and its confirmation by the evidence collected in the case. The validity of the charge in the appointment of a trial in the special order provided for by Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is established by the court outside the court session in the absence of the parties. In any of the above situations, the court is responsible for establishing the validity of the charge since failure to establish it means that the decision made is unfounded.

scholarly journals To the admissibility of the civil law exemption of property from arrest, imposed in the criminal proceedings: domestic and foreign experience

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 190-200
Author(s):  
Natalia Kashtanova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Judicial Protection

The subject of paper deals with the legal nature of measures of criminal procedural compulsionin the form of seizure of property.Methodological basis of the article is based on general scientific dialectical methods of cognitionof objective reality of the legal processes and phenomena that allowed us to conduct anobjective assessment of the state of legislation and law enforcement practice in the proceduralaspects of the cancellation of the seizure of property in criminal proceedings of Russia.The results and scope of it’s application. It is submitted that the cancellation of the seizureof the property (or the individual limit) is allowed only on the grounds and in the mannerprescribed by the criminal procedure law of the Russian Federation. However, the studyfound serious contradictions in the application of the relevant law. In particular, cases inwhich the question of exemption of property from arrest (exclusion from the inventory),imposed in the criminal case was resolved in a civil procedure that, in the opinion of theauthor of the publication, is extremely unacceptable.On the stated issues topics analyzes opinions of scientists who say that the dispute aboutthe release of impounded property may be allowed in civil proceedings, including pendingresolution of the criminal case on the merits. The author strongly disagrees with this positionand supports those experts who argue that the filing of a claim for exemption of propertyfrom arrest (exclusion from the inventory) the reviewed judicial act of imposing of arrestwithout recognition per se invalid. In this regard, the author cites the legal position ofthe constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, from which clearly follows that of theright of everyone to judicial protection does not imply the possibility of choice of the citizenat its discretion, techniques and procedures of judicial protection, since the features of suchjudicial protection is defined in specific Federal laws.The author analyzes and appreciates Kazakhstan's experience of legal regulation of the permissibilityof filing a civil claim for exemption of property from seizure imposed in criminalproceedings. The author notes that the new civil procedural legislation of the Republic ofKazakhstan, which came into force from 01 January 2016, clearly captures that considerationin the civil proceedings are not subject to claims for exemption of property from seizureby the criminal prosecution body.Conclusions. Necessity of amendment to article 422 of the Civil Procedure Code of Russia:this article should not apply to cases of application of measures of criminal procedural compulsionin the form of seizure of property. Among other things, the author proposed additionsto part 9 of article 115 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Russia.

scholarly journals Examination and subsequent evaluation of criminal case materials by the prosecuting attorney as the basis for effective organization of the judicial inquiry

2020 ◽  
pp. 249-261
Author(s):  
Ol'ga Anatol'evna Zayceva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Public Prosecution ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Effective Organization ◽  
Fundamental Consideration

The subject of this article is the activity of the prosecuting attorney in the maintenance of public prosecution. The research methodology includes dialectical, logical, formal-legal, and hermeneutical methods. The legal framework for this research is comprised of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, criminal procedure legislation, as well as local normative acts regulating the questions of participation of prosecutors in the judicial stages of criminal proceedings. Emphasis is made on the questions of theoretical and applied nature, related to consideration of criminal case materials by the prosecutor. The article explores the positions of scholars regarding prosecutor’s preparation for the legal proceedings, specificity of prosecutor's work at the stage of preparing for maintenance of state prosecution in court. The conclusion is formulated that the effectiveness of maintenance of prosecuting attorney depends on the level of his preparation to the legal proceedings, which includes examination of criminal case materials. The author highlights two key stages of preparation of the prosecutor to maintenance of public prosecution: examination and subsequent evaluation of criminal case materials; participation in the preliminary hearing and fundamental consideration of criminal case .The author believes that activity of the prosecutor is aimed at formation of inner conviction and maintenance of prosecution in court.

scholarly journals Termination of a criminal case (criminal prosecution) as a result of voluntary compensation for damage caused by a crime in the russian criminal court legal proceedings

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3B) ◽  
pp. 645-651
Author(s):  
Artem Igorevich Neryakhin ◽  
Dmitriy Aleksandrovich Ivanov ◽  
Vasily Dzhonovich Potapov ◽  
Denis N. Stacyuk ◽  
Tatiana Ivanovna Bondar
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Compensation For Damage

The authors study the controversial issues of termination of a criminal case (criminal prosecution) on the condition of voluntary compensation for the damage caused by the crime by the suspect (accused) during the preliminary investigation. The thesis is proved that in Russian criminal proceedings the procedure for voluntary compensation for damage caused by a crime is quite clearly regulated, and if the suspect (accused) voluntarily compensated for the property damage caused, then their actions will be evaluated within the current legal framework, when the fact of compensation for damage creates grounds for exemption from criminal liability and termination of the criminal case (criminal prosecution) in accordance with Articles 75, 76, 761, 762 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, Articles 25, 251, 28, 281 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Discretionary Model of Legal Regulation of a Criminal Case and Criminal Prosecution Termination: Pro et Contra

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. 214-222
Author(s):  
G. N. Kucherov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Law Enforcement Officer ◽  
The Law

The paper discusses the issues of choosing the most effective model of criminal proceedings termination, analyzes the proposed in the scientific literature model of refusal of the discretion of the law enforcement officer when making an appropriate procedural decision. The author, based on the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, studies the relationship between the principle of justice and the legality of procedural decisions to terminate a criminal case and criminal prosecution. The author concludes that the discretionary model of legal regulation of a criminal case and criminal prosecution termination is an effective means of achieving the purpose of criminal proceedings, allowing the law enforcement officer to make a fair decision, given the nature, degree of social danger of the crime, the circumstances of its commission, information about the identity of the person who committed the crime. Refusal of the discretion of the law enforcement officer in the matter of terminating a criminal case will not only not contribute to the humanization of legislation, but will mark the victory of formalism over justice in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals Mistrust as Grounds for Recusation

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 139-147
Author(s):  
A. S. Taran
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Interpersonal Conflict ◽  
Defense Attorney ◽  
General Idea ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
The Will ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Law

Traditionally, the grounds for recusation are objective circumstances established in the course of criminal proceedings, which exclude the participation of certain subjects in the trial, regardless of the discretion and expression of the will of the parties. The paper substantiates that "other circumstances giving grounds to believe that they are personally, directly or indirectly, interested in the outcome of this criminal case" provided for by Part 2 of Art. 61 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation as a basis for challenging a judge and other persons do not imply the mandatory establishment of interest, it is enough that there are circumstances giving grounds to believe its existence. It is in this interpretation of the law that the general idea underlying the institution of recusation is realized, i.e. ensuring confidence in the composition of the court. Ignoring mistrust in the composition of the court as a basis for recusation leads to violations of the law when resolving recusations in the event of an interpersonal conflict in court, when establishing a corporate relationship between a party and the composition of the court, when recalling a defense attorney, etc.

scholarly journals Relevant issues of conducting verification of reports on illegal banking operations

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Anisya Aleksandrovna Dementyeva
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Law Enforcement Agencies ◽  
Legitimate Business ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Major Attention ◽  
Banking Operations

This article is dedicated to the issues of conducting audit pursuant to the Article 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on report of crimes established by the Article 172 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Methodological framework for this research consists of dialectical, logical, and formal-legal methods; the normative framework is comprised of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, criminal and criminal procedure legislation of the Russian Federation, local normative acts that regulate the conduct of audit initiating at the stage of initiating a criminal case. Major attention is turned to the theoretical and applied issues associated with the initiation of criminal cases stipulated by the Article 172 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Analysis is conducted on the peculiarities of seizure of objects and documents on this category of crime; as well as on the goals, tasks, methods of seizure, and admissible procedural actions. The author examines the questions of admissibility of evidence received at the state of opening a criminal case, their role in subsequent stages of criminal proceedings. Assessment is given to the existing theoretical and practical views on the possibility of instituting a search and seizure prior to opening a criminal case. The author analyzes case law on the topic, and concludes on the need for further amendments. The importance of observing the rights and legitimate interests of individuals and companies in the course of pre-trial proceedings pertinent to the reports of illegal banking operations is substantiated. The author also indicates that arbitrary interference of law enforcement agencies in legitimate business activity is unacceptable.  

scholarly journals The Involvement of a Legal Entity in a Criminal Case

Russian judge ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 25-29
Author(s):  
Vladimir Yu. Stelmakh ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Legal Person ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
Governing Body ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Main Representative

The article analyzes problematic aspects of representation of a legal entity in criminal proceedings. Representatives of a legal person may be all persons listed in the criminal procedure law, but the main representative is a member of the governing body, and the remaining persons are appointed by this body and are additional. Some decisions (for example, an application to initiate criminal proceedings on crimes listed in chapter 23 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) are entitled to be submitted by the governing body as such, and not by its individual members. A distinction is made between the representation of a legal entity in unitary enterprises and joint-stock companies. The possibility of participation of representatives of the owner of a unitary enterprise as a representative of the victim is justified in cases where the director of the enterprise unsatisfactorily performs duties in criminal proceedings or is suspected of committing a crime.

scholarly journals Problems of Using Special Knowledge in Criminal Proceedings and Ways to Solve Them

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 106-110
Author(s):  
O Yu Antonov
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Criminal Case ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Improvement Of Legislation

In article actual problems of using of the conclusions and evidence of specialist parties and the court, appointment of judicial examination before initiation of criminal case, including problems realization of related innovations of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation; the proposals on improvement of legislation, law enforcement practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document