Review of sentences that have entered into legal force in cases considered with the participation of jurors.
The law allows for the possibility of appealing, challenging the sentences and decisions that have entered into force in cases considered with the participation of jurors, and their review by the relevant judicial authorities. As in other cases, judicial acts that have entered into force in the category of cases we are considering may be reviewed twice after they enter into force: by cassation and by way of supervision. Let us first consider the procedure for the parties to appeal these cases to the court of cassation and the procedure for conducting legal proceedings in this instance. The review of judgments and judgments that have entered into legal force in the cassation instance is specific in itself. Firstly, the law sets the time limits for filing complaints and protests with the cassation instance. The general rule is that the appeal to the cassation instance in accordance with the fifth part of Article 446-1 of the CPC on judgments that have entered into force, decisions of district and equivalent courts (including specialized, inter-district courts) is limited to a period of six months. This period is calculated from the date of entry into force of judicial acts, and for the defendant in custody - within the same period from the moment copies of them are handed to him.
Now it is not superfluous to recall when the verdict and decision issued by the specialized interdistrict criminal court, the specialized interdistrict military court for criminal cases considered with the participation of jurors, come into legal force. In accordance with article 447 of the CPC, they enter into legal force and are subject to enforcement upon expiration of the time limit for appeal or appeal, if they are not appealed or protested. In the case of a review of the case in the appellate instance, the verdict, if it is not overturned, comes into force on the day of the appeal ruling. If the appellate (private) complaints or protest are withdrawn before the start of the court of appeal session, the verdict comes into legal force on the day the appellate instance issues a decision to terminate proceedings in connection with the withdrawal of the complaint or protest. A cassation appeal or cassation appeal may be filed against the decisions of the appellate instance that have been upheld, overturned or amended in the category of cases under consideration within six months from the date of their announcement, and the defendants in custody within the same period from the moment they are handed a copy of the decision. The above-mentioned time limits do not apply to cases of filing a complaint or protest about the review in the cassation instance of a conviction that has entered into force on the grounds of the convict's innocence, as well as in connection with the need to apply the law on a less serious crime due to the severity of the punishment or on other grounds entailing an improvement in the convict's situation. The filing of cassation complaints and protests on these grounds is not limited in time. Secondly, the subject of the cassation review under article 446-2 of the CPC is compliance by the court (the legislator does not take into account violations of the criminal procedure law committed during the preliminary investigation of the case), who issued the verdict (resolution), the norms of the criminal and criminal procedure law and on the basis of this verifies the legality, validity and fairness of the verdict (resolution).
And, thirdly, the legislator has established the grounds on which it is possible for the court of cassation to review verdicts and court decisions that have entered into force in cases considered with the participation of jurors, and separately for reviewing acquittals and convictions. According to article 575-1 of the CPC, a cassation review of an acquittal verdict handed down by a court with the participation of jurors and a decision of the appeals board (meaning a decision that did not overturn this verdict) is allowed if significant violations of the criminal procedure law were committed during the trial, which: 1) led to the decision of the verdict by the illegal composition of the jury; 2) deprived the victim of the right to judicial protection. In paragraph 29 of the commented regulatory resolution, the Supreme Court further clarifies that: "The acquittal of a court with the participation of jurors, which has entered into legal force, and the decision of the appeals board may be reviewed by the court of cassation only in cases where the victim's cassation complaint or the prosecutor's cassation protest, in addition to indicating significant violations of the CPC norm, is disputed, and the substance of the acquittal , and the circumstances will be determined during the cassation review ., provided for in paragraphs 1) and 2) of the first part of Article 575-1 of the CPC, and the illegality of the acquittal." Thus, in order for the cassation instance to have the procedural possibilities and grounds for revoking the acquittal, it is not enough in the appeal or protest to indicate the existence, in the opinion of their authors, of violations of the criminal procedure law specified in paragraphs 1)-2) of the first part of Article 575 of the CPC, but it is also necessary to indicate their disagreement with the acquittal on the merits.. But this is still not enough. It is required that the existence of these violations of the criminal procedure law be proved at the hearing of the cassation instance and, as a result, the illegality of the acquittal be proved, and that the court be convinced of this.
In this regard, in cassation appeals and protests, the authors must provide appropriate arguments and evidence confirming the above-mentioned violations. "It should be borne in mind," the Supreme Court further explains., - "that the composition of the panel of jurors may be declared illegal if the panel includes persons who are not included or are not subject to inclusion in the unified and reserve (annual) lists of candidates for jurors in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 10 of the Law "On Jurors", subject to exemption from the duties of a juror in accordance with the second part of Article 552 of the CPC, as well as when establishing a juror in the panel who concealed information during the selection of jurors., preventing them from fulfilling their duties as a juror." It follows from this explanation that the composition of the jury is considered illegal, and therefore an acquittal is also considered if: a) the jury is formed from among some persons who are not listed in the unified and reserve (annual) lists of candidates for jurors.; b) persons have been selected to the jury who, although they are listed in the unified and reserve (annual) lists of candidates for jurors, but in accordance with paragraph 1 of Article 10 of the Law "On Jurors", were not subject to inclusion in them; c) a candidate for jurors who is listed in these lists during the selection process for the jury, he concealed information, and not any information, but only the information that, in accordance with the law, is indicated as preventing this person from fulfilling the duties of a juror. The Supreme Court, in paragraph 29 of the normative resolution, reveals what should be understood by depriving the victim of the right to judicial protection. These are: - restrictions in the main court proceedings on the rights of the victim provided for in paragraphs 2), 3) 4), 14), 15, 16) the sixth part of Article 75 of the CPC, namely: - the victim's right to testify in his native language or the language he speaks was not ensured; - the victim was not given the opportunity to present evidence; - the victim was deprived of the opportunity to file petitions, including for security measures, and challenges or his rights were significantly limited; - the case was considered without the victim's participation, although he did not file a petition to consider the case without him and did not otherwise express his unwillingness to participate in the trial of the case in the court of first and appeal - the victim was not given the opportunity to speak in court arguments.; - the victim could not support the prosecution for any reason, including in the case of the public prosecutor's refusal to charge; - the evidence presented by the victim or his representative that is relevant to the case was not investigated; - such evidence was unlawfully excluded from judicial review;
According to the second part of Article 575-1 of the CPC, a conviction in part is also subject to cassation review.: 1) incorrect determination of the type of recidivism and the type of regime of the correctional colony; 2) incorrect resolution of a civil claim, except in cases of abandonment of the claim without consideration; and an illegal decision issued in the execution of a sentence by a specialized interdistrict criminal court, a specialized military criminal court. In accordance with part four of Article 575-1 of the CPC, if the verdict is overturned on the grounds provided for in part one of this article, the case is sent for a new hearing to the court of first instance. In the third part of Article 575-1 of the CPC, it is stated that the cassation instance, considering the case on cassation complaints, protests, has the right to apply the criminal law on a less serious crime to the convicted person and reduce the punishment in accordance with the modified qualification of the deed.
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
