scholarly journals INSPECTION OF A SCENE: ORGANIZATIONAL AND TACTICAL FOUNDATIONS OF OPTIMIZATION OF ITS PRODUCTION AND FIXATION OF THE RESULTS

The article deals with the fundamentals of organization, tactics of production and fixing the results of one of the most important investigative actions. The authors note that the quality of the investigation of the crime as a whole and the results of the trial largely depend on the quality of the inspection of the scene. At the same time, the inspection efficiency and the objectivity of fixation depend on the scientific and technical means, methods and technologies used in its production. Attention is paid to the issues of organization of interaction both in the course of a study of the situation and objects, and when displaying information in the protocol and its annexes. It is especially important in connection with the changes in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation introduced by the Federal Law № 23-FZ of March 4, 2013. Given that the inspection is a collective investigative action, not only the professional qualities of each employee involved, but also the coordinated work of the whole team significantly impact on the efficiency of its production and the quality of displaying the obtained data in the relevant documents. Special attention is drawn to the organizational problems of the work of investigative operational groups, which, in practice, are formed at random. One of the ways to optimize this investigative action and the fixation of the obtained information is to form investigative-operational groups, taking into account the psychological compatibility and teamwork of participants.

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Лев Бертовский ◽  
Lyev Byertovskiy ◽  
Дина Гехова ◽  
Dina Gekhova

Federal Law No. 433-FZ «On Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the Annulment of Certain Legislative Acts (Provisions of Legislative Acts) of the Russian Federation» entered into force since January 1, 2013 in relation to the powers of prosecutors to lodge cassation representations against court’s decisions is under review in the article. The authors analyse judicial practice of cassation instance in Moscow City Court of 2014 year on criminal cases and demonstrate some omissions of prosecutors in consideration of cases in the court of cassation. The conclusion shows that a cassation representation should be prepared and submitted by subordinate to higher prosecutor, provided that public prosecutor shall obtain the right to apply directly to that prosecutor who has the right to lodge a cassation representation along with the project thereof. Such novel will positively influence to the quality of cassation representations prepared and made by prosecutors.


Author(s):  
Nikolay Letelkin ◽  
Dmitry Neganov

The article examines the situationality of modern lawmaking in the field of criminal law in the context of the adoption of the federal law of 1.04.2020 No. 100-FZ «On Amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and Articles 31 and 151 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation», adopted by the State The Duma of the Russian Federation in connection with the pandemics of the Corona Virus Disеаsе 2019 (COVID-19).


Author(s):  
V. A. Popov ◽  
A. A. Pudovkin

Home invasion crimes are among the most common and difficult to solve criminal acts. Of particular importance in the detection of thefts of this category is crime scene examination. The authors consider some organizational problems that arise during the crime scene examination in investigative practice, give recommendations for their elimination. The authors also note that in law enforcement practice, when examining a crime scene for home invasion robberies, there are many difficulties associated with the correct and accurate application of the norms of the criminal procedure law due to the gaps in the legislation. Thus, there is no separate rule in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation devoted exclusively to the crime scene examination, the issue of the need to seek the consent of residents when the inspection of the scene of the incident is carried out in the dwelling, as well as a number of other gaps that complicate the crime scene examination in the dwelling is not filled. The authors suggest ways to solve these problems.


Author(s):  
E. A. Perova

Part 2 of Article 389.17 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation establishes a list of unconditionally significant violations of the norms of the criminal procedure law, the identification of which in a case entails the cancellation or change of the sentence in every case without exception. The range of these violations was determined by the legislator during the development of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation in 2001, and has not changed since then. However, the rules, violation of which can affect the quality of the sentence and lead to its cancellation in each case, have changed more than once. Including the norms governing the institution of returning the case to the prosecutor in accordance with Art. 237 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and determining the significance of this institution for the issuance of a legal, reasonable and fair sentence. In this regard, this article discusses the feasibility of expanding the list of unconditional grounds for canceling a sentence by including a violation associated with the failure of the court to take measures to return the criminal case to the prosecutor in accordance with Art. 237 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, if there are grounds for that.


Author(s):  
Nikolay Podol’nyy

One of the many guarantees of fairness in criminal proceedings is the quality of consideration of a report of a crime at the stage of initiation of a criminal case. This quality is largely due to the quality of expert opinions. But the practice of applying the rule of article 144 of the Criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation faces difficulties in conducting expert research in the time allotted for considering reports of a crime. There is a question about the reasonableness of the timing of the expert opinion. This and related problems are discussed in the article provided.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 52-57
Author(s):  
Samvel M. Kochoi ◽  

The paper concludes that article 171 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (as amended by Federal law No. 203-FZ of 26.07.2017) and the practice of its application are not only contradictory, but also contain certain shortcomings. Formulated proposals on the directions of changes and additions to the «business» norms of the Criminal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. An exception from the Criminal Code article 171 and the qualification an act that falls under the «illegal business» according to article 198 or 199 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is considered as one of these areas.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 167-188
Author(s):  
Oksana V. Kachalova ◽  
◽  
Viktor I. Kachalov

Introduction. 2021 marks the 20th anniversary of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, adopted by the State Duma on November 22, 2001 by Federal Law No. 174-FZ. The development of criminal procedure legislation in these years was not always consistent, often characterized by chaotic and hasty measures. Nevertheless, the main factors that determine the development of modern criminal procedure legislation, as well as the key trends in the legal regulation of criminal procedure legal relations, have remained fairly stable for twenty years. Theoretical Basis. Methods. The object of the study is the norms of criminal procedure law that have emerged and developed during the period of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation since 2001. The methodological basis of the study is the general dialectical method of scientific knowledge, which allowed us to study the subject of the study in relation to other legal phenomena, as well as general scientific methods of knowledge (analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, analogy, and modelling) and private scientific methods of knowledge (formal legal, historical-legal, and comparative-legal). Results. Among the variety of various factors that determine the development of modern criminal procedure legislation, there are several main ones: 1. The impact of international standards in the field of criminal justice on Russian criminal proceedings. Having ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Citizens’ Rights and Freedoms in 1998, Russia voluntarily assumed obligations in the field of ensuring citizens rights and freedoms, as well as creating the necessary conditions for their implementation. Among the most important criminal procedure norms and institutions that have emerged in the system of criminal procedure regulation under the influence of the positions of the ECHR, the following are notable: a reasonable period of criminal proceedings, the rights of participants in the verification of a crime report, the disclosure of the testimony of an absent witness at a court session, and alternative preventive measures to detention. 2. Optimisation of procedural resources and improvement of the efficiency of criminal proceedings. From the very beginning of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, there was a special procedure for judicial proceedings, which is a simplified form of consideration of criminal cases, provided for in Chapter 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. In 2009, this procedure was extended to cases with concluded pre-trial cooperation agreements (Chapter 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation), and in 2013, the institute of abbreviated inquiry appeared in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (Chapter 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation). 3. Social demand for increasing the independence of the court, and the adversarial nature of criminal proceedings. Society’s needs to improve the independence of judges, increase public confidence in the court, transparency and quality of justice led to the reform of the jury court in 2016 (Federal Law of 23 June 2016 N 190-FZ). As a result of the reform, the court with the participation of jurors began to function at the level of district courts, the jurisdiction of criminal cases for jurors was expanded, the number of jurors was reduced from 12 to 8 in regional courts and 6 in district courts. However, practice has shown that sentences handed down by a court on the basis of a verdict rendered by a jury are overturned by higher courts much more often than others due to committed violations, which are associated, among other things, with the inability to ensure the objectivity of jurors. In the context of a request for an independent court, Article 81 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation on the independence of judges (Federal Law of 2 July 2013 N 166-FZ) was adopted. 4. Reducing the degree of criminal repression. In the context of this trend, institutions have emerged in the criminal and criminal procedure laws that regulate new types of exemption from criminal liability. In 2011, Article 281 “Termination of criminal prosecution in connection with compensation for damage” was adopted, concerning a number of criminal cases on tax and other economic crimes (Federal Law of 7 December 2011 N 420). In 2016, the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation introduced rules on the termination of a criminal case or criminal prosecution in connection with the appointment of a criminal law measure in the form of a court fine (Federal Law of 3 July 2016 N 323-FZ). 5. Digitalisation of modern society. The rapid development of information technologies and their implementation in all spheres of public life has put on the agenda the question of adapting a rather archaic “paper” criminal process to the needs of today, and the possibilities of using modern information technologies in the process of criminal proceedings. Among the innovations in this area, it should be noted the appearance in the criminal procedure law of Article 1861 “Obtaining information about connections between subscribers and (or) subscriber devices” (Federal Law of 1 July 2010 N 143-FZ), Article 4741 “The procedure for using electronic documents in criminal proceedings” (Federal Law of 23 June 2016 N 220-FZ), the legal regulation of video-conferencing in criminal proceedings (Federal Law of 20 March 2011 N 39-FZ), and the introduction of audio recording of court sessions (Federal Law of 29 July 2018-FZ N 228-FZ), etс. Currently, the possibilities of further digitalisation of criminal proceedings, and the use of programs based on artificial intelligence in criminal proceedings, ets. are being actively discussed. Discussion and Conclusion. The main factors determining the vector of development of modern criminal justice should, in our opinion, include the impact of international standards in the field of criminal justice on Russian criminal justice; optimisation of procedural resources and the need to improve the efficiency of criminal justice, social demands for strengthening the independence of the court, adversarial criminal proceedings; the needs of society to reduce the degree of criminal repression, and digitalisation of modern society.


2020 ◽  
pp. 123-126
Author(s):  
Olga N. Nadonenko ◽  

The current legislation formalizes three elements of the expert system in Russia: state and non-state expert institutions and experts who do not work in expert institutions. As follows from this triad, the defining concept is “expert institution”. The concept “state expert institution” is legally enshrined in Federal Law No. 73-FZ of May 31, 2001, but there is currently no legislative regulation of the criteria for classifying an organization as a “non-state expert institution”, which gives rise to a number of law enforcement problems. For instance, for an investigator, determining the status of an organization entails the implementation of the provisions of Article 199 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation under Clause 1.2 or Clause 4. Therefore, in the author’s opinion, it is extremely important to pass a law regulating the criteria for classifying an organization as a state or non-state expert institution, or a non-expert institution.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document