Issue 2 (20) 2013

Borisevich On the Significant, Unrecoverable, Fundamental Law Violations as the Reasons for Cancelling or Changing the Court Decisions on Criminal Cases

On the Significant, Unrecoverable, Fundamental Law Violations as the Reasons for Cancelling or Changing the Court Decisions on Criminal Cases

G.Ya. Borisevich

Perm State National Research University
15, Bukirev st., Perm, 614990
E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

The content of abrogation or variation of judgments on appeals procedure like significant violations of criminal-procedural legislation was investigated.

These violations by depriving or limitation of guaranteed by Code of Criminal Procedure of Russian Federation the rights of participants of criminal proceedings, noncompliance with process of legal proceedings or otherwise have influenced or could have influenced on imposition of a lawful and reasonable judicial decision.

The conditional and unconditional significant interruptions of the criminal-procedural legislation were shown. The content of part 1 article 389.22 is considered: condemnatory convictions or other judgments of the first instance should be abolished and criminal cases should be transmitted to the new trial, if at the trial of the first instance have been permitted interruptions of the criminal-procedural and (or) criminal legislations, which are irremovable in the Court of appeals instance.

It has been shown, that the content and meaning of the irremovable interruptions as fundamental (principled, significant), which influence on the result of the case.

The fundamental interruptions of legislation take place in situations, when uncorrected mistake of the court distort the substance of justice, sense of the sentence as act of justice, which destroy a necessary balance of the constitutionally-protected interests of convicted and injured persons.

It has been shown, that fundamental violations might be not only significant violations of criminal-procedural, but also criminal legislation, which present the greatest mistakes of its application.

Condemnatory conviction or another judgment should be abolished and criminal cases should be transmitted to the prosecutor, if at the trial of the appeals instance will be detected the circumstances, which are indicated in part 1 article 237 of Code of Criminal Procedure of Russian Federation. The Court of appeals instance belong these interruptions to unrecoverable violations.

There are recommendations of explanation and application of the number of rules in consecutive and judicial practice in the article, which are fixed in articles 389.17, 389.22, 401.6, 401.15, 412.9 of Code of Criminal Procedure of Russian Federation.

Keywords: Abrogation or variation of judgments; significant, unrecoverable, fundamental interruptions of criminal-procedural and criminal legislations

Bibliograficheskij spisok

1. Bozh'ev V. Sushhestvennye narushenija norm UPK // Zakonnost'. 2009. №1. S. 4–8.

2. Voskobitova L.A. Osnovanija otmeny ili izmenenija prigovora v apelljacionnoj instancii // Lex Russica. M.: Izd-vo MGJuA. 2012. №5. S. 988–989.

3. Dikarev I.S. Ponjatie «fundamental'noe narushenie» v ugolovnom processe // Ros. sud'ja. 2009. №8. S. 51.

4. O primenenii norm Ugolovno-processual'nogo kodeksa Rossijskoj Federacii, regulirujushhih proizvodstvo v sude apelljacionnoj instancii»: postanovlenie Plenuma Verhov. Suda ror ot 27 nojabrja 2012 g.

5. Obzor ugolovno-sudebnoj praktiki upravlenija po obespecheniju uchastija prokurora v rassmotrenii ugolovnyh del sudami prokuratury Permskogo kraja. Perm', 2012. №3 S. 7, 10–13.

6. Opredelenie Konstitucionnogo suda RF ot 2 fevr. 2006 g. №57-O // Vestnik Konstitucionnogo suda RF. 2006. №3.

7. Osmanov T.S. Osnovanija otmeny ili izmenenija sudebnyh reshenij po ugolovnym delam v porjadke nadzora // Ros. sud'ja. 2010. №12. S. 28.

8. Osnovanija otmeny i izmenenija sudebnyh reshenij po ugolovnym delam / pod obshh. red. Predsedatelja Verhovnogo Suda RF V.M. Lebedeva. M.: Norma, 2008.

9. Po delu o proverke konstitucionnosti polozhenij 4. ch. 1i 2 st. 295 UPK RSFSR v svjazi s zhaloboj grazhdanina M.A. Baronina: postanovlenie Konstituc. suda RF ot 15 janvarja 1999 g. №1-P. // Vestnik Konstituc. suda RF. 1999. №2.

10. Po delu o proverke konstitucionnosti polozhenij statej 237, 413 i 418 UPK RF v svjazi s zaprosom prezidiuma Kurganskogo oblastnogo suda: postanovlenie Konstituc. suda RF ot 16 maja 2007 g. №6-P // Vestnik Konstitucionnogo suda RF. 2007. №3.

11. Po delu o proverke konstitucionnosti polozhenij ch. 2 st. 335 UPK RSFSR v svjazi s zhaloboj grazhdanina M.A. Baronina: postanovlenie Konstituc. suda RF ot 10 dek. 1998 g. №27-P// Vestnik Konstituc. suda RF. 1999. №2.

12. Po delu o proverke konstitucionnosti st. 405 UPK RF v svjazi s zaprosom Kurganskogo oblastnogo suda, zhalobami Upolnomochennogo po pravam cheloveka v RF, proizvodstvenno – tehnicheskogo kooperativa «Sodejstvie», obshhestva s ogranichennoj otvetstvennost'ju «Karelija» i rjada grazhdan»: postanovlenie Konstitucionnogo suda RF ot 11 maja 2005 g. №5-P // Vestnik Konstituc. suda. 2005. №4.

13. Postanovlenie Konstitucionnogo suda RF ot 8 dek. 2003 g. №18-P // Vestnik Konstitucionnogo suda RF. 2004. №1.

14. Postanovlenie Plenuma Verhovnogo Suda RF ot 5 marta 2004 g. №5 // Bjul. Verhov. Suda RF. 2004. №5.

15. Postanovlenie Prezidiuma Verhovnogo Suda RF ot 11 dek. 2002 g. // Bjul. Verhov. Suda RF. 2003. №11. S. 19.

16. Postanovlenie prezidiuma Permskogo kraevogo suda ot 15 ijunja 2012 g. po delu №44u-207.

17. Postanovlenie prezidiuma Permskogo kraevogo suda ot 5 ijunja 2009 g. po delu №44-u-2071.

18. Smirnov A.V., Kalinovskij K.B. Ugolovnyj process: uchebnik. M.: Norma, 2007. 704 s.

19. Sobranie zakonodatel'stva RF. 2001 №2, st. 163.

20. Chervotkin A.S. Apelljacija i kassacija: posobie dlja sudej. M.: Prospekt, 2013. S. 260–262.

21. Ru.znatock.com/docs/index-49826.html.