Administrative responsibility for a traffic accident | administrative case on violation of traffic rules

The court considered in open court with the use of audio-video recording the case of an administrative offense against: I.S.B., in committing an administrative offense under art.608 Part 3 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Administrative Offenses", According to the protocol on the administrative offense of 19.10.2019 5-40 hours I.S.B. intoxicated in Gitikara along Lenin Street driving a Skoda Oktavia vehicle with Mr.....10, having lost control of the steering, collided with a power transmission pole and damaged a curb stone. As a result, mechanical damage and material damage were caused, thereby gr. I.S.B., violating clauses 10.9; 2.4.2 of the Traffic Rules, committed an administrative offense under art. 608 part 3 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offenses. I.S.B. partially admitted guilt at the hearing, explained to the court that it really was Traffic accident, does not recognize being under the influence of alcohol. I do not agree with the conclusion of the examination, I underwent a second examination within two hours, where no alcohol was found in the blood. The defender is the lawyer Nigmetov S.D. Requests that I.S.B.'s actions be reclassified to 610 Part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, since the alcohol condition is refuted by the act of chemical and toxicological examination, according to which no ethyl alcohol was found in the blood. Taking into account the circumstances of the case, he asks to reduce the amount of the fine by 30%. The victim's representative by proxy J.A.A., reads that the accident was caused by I.S.B., asks not to punish strictly. The damage has been fully compensated.

 

The narcologist D.I.L., who was questioned as an expert, explained to the court that there were doubts about the doctor's conclusion. The conclusion does not comply with the instructions, since objective data are the leading ones when they are carried out to establish intoxication. In case of doubt, the doctor should have taken the blood immediately. According to the objective clinic, he was not in a state of moderate alcohol intoxication, which indicates that the condition in the Romberg pose is stable. Such data as blundering, sluggish facial expressions, and bad breath can occur in a sober person with severe fatigue. The main one is horizontal nystagmus, but in this case the pupils are preserved, which should not be. Alcohol therapy is used as an auxiliary method and it is impossible to rely solely on it, since the clinical picture as a whole is the leading one. In general, there are still shortcomings in filling out the report, which do not affect the degree of intoxication. According to the chemical toxicological examination report, everything is indicated correctly, no ethyl alcohol was found in the blood, which corresponds to the fact that the person is sober. The time is indicated in the examination log, and a second examination by N.L.B.'s doctor was carried out within two hours. After hearing the explanations of the participants in the process, having examined and studied the materials of the administrative case, the court comes to the following conclusions. In accordance with Part 2 of Article 40 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offenses, administrative penalties are applied in order to restore social justice and educate the person who committed the offense in the spirit of compliance with the requirements of the law and respect for the rule of law, as well as to prevent the commission of new offenses, both by the offender and others. According to the conclusion of the medical examination to establish the fact of alcohol consumption and intoxication No. 717 dated 19.10.2019, I.S.B. was in a state of severe alcoholic intoxication. Paragraph 3 of the "Rules for conducting a medical examination to establish the use of a psychoactive substance and intoxication", approved by the Order of the Minister of Health of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated July 13, 2017 No. 504, states that the basis of a medical opinion on the condition associated with alcohol and psychoactive substances is the data of a clinical examination in the form of a comprehensive assessment of mental and somatoneurological condition. In conclusion No. 717 concerning I.S.B. The description of the clinical condition of the examinee is indicated, which characterize the condition at the time of the examination. The reason for the examination: suspicion of intoxication while driving a vehicle. Behavior drowsy, inhibited the state of consciousness is preserved; pupils are preserved, the reaction to light is preserved; horizontal nystagmus; facial expressions are sluggish; the state in the Romberg pose is stable; missing the finger is a nasal test; there is no hand tremor; bad breath. Expert D.I.L. being a narcologist, I confirmed the conclusion No. 717 issued on 19.10.2019, which is questionable, since the leading ones are objective data such as horizontal nystagmus, which manifests itself only in people who are in a state of alcohol, while the Romberg pose and the finger-nasal test are not unimportant, however, during examination in the Romberg pose, it is stable pupils are preserved, which should not be the case with horizontal nystagmus.

 

Act No. 3348 of 19.10.2019 states that no ethyl alcohol was found in the blood in the delivered sample, which is consistent with paragraph 12 of the Rules, which states that the evaluation of indicators in the blood test for alcohol is carried out according to a standardized ratio of the quantitative alcohol content in the blood and the assessment of the clinical condition of the person being examined. By virtue of art . 829-14 p.4 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, having recognized, as a result of the consideration of the case, an incorrect legal assessment of what was done, the court is obliged to change the qualification of the offense to an article of the law providing for a less severe administrative penalty. In such circumstances, the offense committed by I.S.B. is subject to reclassification from art. 608 part 3 to art. 610 Part 1, since the actions of I.S.B. did not confirm alcohol intoxication. In this case, gr. I.S.B. driving a motor vehicle in violation of pp. 10.9 of the Traffic Rules, allowed a collision with a power line pole and a curb stone, for this violation is subject to administrative liability provided for in art. 610 Part 1 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offenses. The guilt of gr. I.S.B. in the commission of an administrative offense under art. 1 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offenses, is confirmed by the evidence available in the materials of the administrative case and announced during the court session: the protocol on administrative violation of traffic rules, diagrams of a traffic accident, as well as written explanations and other case materials. When imposing an administrative penalty, the court in accordance with paragraph 1 of art. 56 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offenses has not been established by the court as circumstances mitigating responsibility, circumstances aggravating the administrative responsibility of the offender in the case. Having considered the materials of the administrative case, taking into account the nature of the offense committed, the identity of the offender, who had not previously been involved in similar offenses, the court considers it possible to limit itself to an administrative fine, within the sanction of art. 610 Part 1 of the Administrative Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan in the amount of 20 MCI, equal to 50,500 tenge. Based on the above and guided by art. 829-14,829-16 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offenses, the judge RULED: To bring I.S.B. to administrative responsibility for committing an administrative offense under art. 610 part 1 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Administrative Offenses and impose an administrative penalty in the form of an administrative fine in the amount of 20 MCI, equal to 50,500 (fifty thousand five hundred) tenge to the state income. According to art . 893 KRK on AP, the fine is payable by the person brought to administrative responsibility no later than thirty days from the date of entry into force of the resolution.  Lawyer Almaty Zanger Almaty Korgaushy Almaty Zan kyzmeti Kykyk korgau Kyktyk komek Zanger kens Azamattyk isteri Kylmystyk isteri Akimshilik isteri Arbitration daulary Zanger kens Kazakhstan Lawyer Kazakhstan Zanger Kazakhstan Lawyer Kazakhstan Kazakhstan Korgaushi Kazakhstan Zan companys Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Almaty Lawyer Kazakhstan Lawyer Kazakhstan Legal service Legal advice Civil cases disputes Criminal cases Defense Administrative cases disputes Arbitration cases disputes Law firm Law Firm Advocate Kazakhstan Lawyer Kazakhstan Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Firm of Kazakhstan

 

Attention!   

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information,  please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office  Court Cases