Comparative Analysis of Appeal and Appeal in Cassation Procedure for Considering Criminal Cases

Панокин Александр Михайлович

doi:10.17803/1729-5920.2017.130.9.093-106

Abstract

The article analyses the correlation of appeal and appeal in cassation procedure for criminal cases and compares the object and subject of appeal and appeal in cassation. The author singles out their features, including those set by the ECHR and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, making it possible to distinguish between the appeal procedure and appeal in cassation procedure for criminal cases. The article discusses the features of excitation of appeal and cassation procedure, as well as their impact on the effectiveness of the judicial review. The author examines particularities of the organization of the court system, enabling appeal in cassation and outlines the factors that allow the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation provide for greater integrity of judicial practice and law. The author notes the importance of the principle of legal certainty as a basis for truth of the judgement for the system of verification of the stages of the criminal procedure. To differentiate between an appeal and appeal in cassation procedure the author determines the possibility of a separate check of the actual circumstances of the criminal case and legal issues, the impact of these factors on the convicted or aquit-ted person's participation in the meeting of the courts of appeal and cassation; the grounds for cancellation or modification of the judgement; procedure for review of judicial decisions; decisions taken by appellate and cassation courts. Comparative analysis of negative effects of appeal and appeal in cassation is conducted. The ratio between the timing of the appeal and appeal in cassation, as well as the impact of the latter on the evaluation of ECHR Russian appeal as ineffective remedies is considered. As a result, an effective remedy to be exhausted based on P. 1 Art. 35 of the ECHR is the appellate review of judicial decisions. The author explores the special powers of the President of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and his Deputy in review of court decisions (P. 3 Art. 401.8 of the the Criminal Procedural Code of the Russian Federation). The author outlines the features of appeal in cassation procedure indicating its extraordinarity, which helps to ensure the legal stability and legal certainty.

Highlights

The author singles out their features, including those set by the ECHR and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, making it possible to distinguish between the appeal procedure and appeal in cassation procedure for criminal cases
To differentiate between an appeal and appeal in cassation procedure the author determines the possibility of a separate check of the actual circumstances of the criminal case and legal issues, the impact of these factors on the convicted or aquitted person's participation in the meeting of the courts of appeal and cassation; the grounds for cancellation or modification of the judgement; procedure for review of judicial decisions; decisions taken by appellate and cassation courts
An effective remedy to be exhausted based on P. 1 Art. 35 of the ECHR is the appellate review of judicial decisions

Summary

Introduction

В качестве границы между апелляционным и кассационным производством определяются возможность отдельной проверки фактических обстоятельств уголовного дела и правовых вопросов, воздействие указанных факторов на участие в заседании судов апелляционной и кассационной инстанций осужденного, оправданного, лица, в отношении которого уголовное дело прекращено; основания отмены или изменения судебного решения; процедура пересмотра судебных решений; принимаемые судами апелляционной и кассационной инстанций решения. Постановлению об отказе в передаче кассационных жалобы, представления для рассмотрения в судебном заседании суда кассационной инстанции, принятому судьей единолично и без проведения судебного заседания, придавалась большая юридическая сила, чем постановлению президиума верховного суда республики, краевого или областного суда, суда города федерального значения, суда автономной области, суда автономного округа, окружного (флотского) военного суда, принятому коллегиально в судебном заседании.

Results

Conclusion