The history demonstrates that the national morally legal consciousness of a russian society is quite developed even at its early stages of development. The role of the criminal procedure as a social institute lies in the affordance of the tooling that provides justice to the society. The requirements of a moral nature are based on the aim and principles of criminal procedure.

The article analyses functional model of Russian criminal justice. It demonstrates criteria for construction of such a model, clarifies the purpose, objectives and tasks of the modern criminal proceedings, influencing the determination of the content of main procedural functions and the content of sub-functions of pre-trial proceedings.

The article considers problems of legal regulation of possible and proper behavior of participants in criminal proceedings. The author draws attention to the fact that in the criminal procedure code of the Russian Federation practically is not mentioned on the obligations of participants in criminal proceedings, and argues that the effective action of criminal procedure required a balance between subjective rights and legal responsibilities.

The work analyzes the terms concerning the mental state of the participants in the criminal process, taking into account similar concepts used in the norms of different branches of law.

The article analyzes debatable issues of attributing the presumption of innocence to the principles of criminal justice. The conclusion is justified that legal presumptions, including the presumption of innocence, the presumption of knowledge of the law, the presumption of harm caused by violation of the right to legal proceedings within a reasonable time, may have the status of a principle or an element of it, provided that they meet the requirements imposed on principles: normativity, regulativity axiomatism (nonderivability), conceptuality, inviolability, universality, etc. It is shown that a principle of criminal justice can be a presumption of law that has no statistical foundation, and that features a low level of probability. The author substantiates the provision that principles of criminal justice may recognize certain elements of the general legal status of an individual if their restriction is allowed in the conducting of criminal proceedings and, consequently, establishing the grounds, conditions, procedure and time limits for their limitation is required: the presumption of innocence, the inviolability of the person, the inviolability of the home, etc.

The article is dedicated to the current condition of substantiation process in criminal cases on tax crimes which takes into account not only the regulations of tax legislation but also the practice of its application by fiscal and judicial bodies. The connection between tax and criminal procedure legislation when it comes to proving the considered category of crimes is established not only by the author of the article but is also being traced in by-laws issued by tax and investigative bodies, a critical analysis of which is provided in the article. Approaches of arbitration courts1 to resolving tax disputes are also taken into consideration when it comes to investigating and resolving criminal cases on tax crimes, however it is necessary to consider changes in arbitration jurisprudence caused, inter alia, by the latest changes in tax legislation, particularly, by introducing of art. 54.1 into Tax Code of the Russian Federation. In conclusion the author cites the most recent legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on resolving civil claims within criminal cases on tax crimes and statistics on tax disputes revised by arbitration courts, and on criminal cases on tax crimes.

In article raises questions of restriction of the right to free exit from the Russian Federation separate categories of persons which have admission to information that contains state secret. Problem of absence reasons to restriction of the right to free exit and uniform procedure of pass decision about temporary restriction of the right to free exit from the Russian Federation separate categories of persons is considered. Proposes amendments to the Law on State Secrets.

In the article considers the problem of proving the defendant’s insanity in a jury trial, on the basis of a comparative legal analysis of the legislation of the Russian Federation (pre-revolutionary period and current) and a number of foreign countries. The author notes that under the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation the question of the defendant’s insanity is attributed to the exclusive competence of the presiding judge and cannot be considered with the participation of jurors. The conclusion of such research is formulated by the judge either in the resolution on termination of hearing the criminal case with the participation of jurors and referring it to the court for the application of compulsory medical measures (if the judge establishes insanity) or in the sentence (if the judge ascertains the defendant’s sanity). In the foreign models of jury trial proceeding, the question of the defendant’s insanity is attributed to the competence of the jury, and the accused is given the opportunity to defend himself by the insanity defense. The author considers the solution of this issue under the legislation of Great Britain, where jury is authorized to provide a special verdict on the defendant’s insanity, the USA (where jurors can provide three forms of verdicts affecting the mental state of the accused at the time of the crime), Austria, Belgium and Spain. The article considers the approach to solving this issue in the prerevolutionary Russian jury trial, where jury was also authorized to establish the fact of the accused mental illness. The author expresses the proposal to expand the jurors’ authority by giving them the opportunity to make a decision about the defendant’s insanity at the time of commission of an arguable act.

The article is dedicated to the actual issues of implementation of the international law standards of the reading out of testimony of a witness procedure in criminal proceedings in the context of «counterbalancing factors» doctrine, elaborated in the ECHR case law. On the basis of the brand new case law of the ECHR and Russian courts content, evolution and specificities of realization of the aforementioned doctrine are being analyzed. Author’s classification of the compensatory safeguards in the situation of reading out of a testimony is presented, rules aimed at striking of a fair balance when delivering an accusatory judgement are formulated as well as recommendations for specifying of the legal positions of the Supreme Court of Russia are proposed.

The correlation of the legal regulation of the grounds for the cancellation or change of a court judgment under appeal procedure in the main (general) norm (art. 389.15 of the Russian Federation Code of Criminal Procedure), whose provisions are described in the detailing and variant norms (Art. 389.16-389.18 of the Russian Federation Code of Criminal Procedure), is discussed in the article. The author comes to the conclusion that several provisions of the Russian Federation Code of Criminal Procedure can be applied to one factual situation with which the criminally-remedial law connects the cancellation or change of a judgment, i.e. a competition between the criminally-remedial norms arises. The difficulties, which arise in the practice and are related to the choice by a judge of a norm for the factual circumstances substantiated by it and the application to them of one or several provisions of Art. 389.15-389.18 of the Russian Federation Code of Criminal Procedure, are also analyzed in the article. It is pointed out that the monitoring of the legality, justification and fairness of a sentence as well as of the legality and justification of another first-instance court judgment are interconnected and hard to separate in practice in the appeal proceedings. The universality of the form of action allows to consider any violation, serving as a ground for the cancellation or change of a judgment on appeal, as a material violation of the criminally-remedial law.

Changes in the system of courts have resulted in a certain imbalance in the verification of court decisions that have entered into legal force. The desire of higher authorities to correct judicial errors at any cost leads to confusion of various criminal procedure institutions, erosion of the system of grounds for the abolition or modification of judicial decisions. However, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in the framework of judicial practice developed certain criteria for the differentiation of cassation, supervisory proceedings and the resumption of criminal proceedings in view of new or newly discovered circumstances.

He article deals with issues of civil suit under streamlined litigation proceedings, that is a special procedure of taking judicial decisions when the accused agrees with an accusation presented and when coming to a pretrial immunity agreement. It is noted that modern legal regulation, proceeding from the appointment of a criminal proceeding, obliges the courts to resolve the civil claim brought in the case when deciding a guilty verdict. Often, the claims of the victims are formed not only from the amount of damage specified in the criminal law story, but also compensation for moral harm, recovery of other legitimate monetary costs. In such situations, courts often erroneously refer to the issue of the amount of compensation for a civil procedure. This practice complicates the realization of the constitutional right of the victim to timely compensation for damage and reduces the significance of the sentence as an act of justice. It is proposed to work out a unified approach to the resolution of civil suits in expedited judicial procedures: the consent of the accused with the charge is also an agreement with the civil suit. Accordingly, the court, when deciding a conviction, must decide on the full (partial) satisfaction of the claim, the termination of proceedings on the suit or the refusal to satisfy the claim. And only in exceptional cases the court is entitled to apply the provisions of Part 2 of Art. 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The appearance of a dispute in a suit entails the termination of a special procedure for the trial and the appointment of a case in accordance with the general procedure.

This article is devoted to the current problems of supervision of the prosecutor for the institution and investigation of criminal cases. In 2007, the prosecutor was devoted of effective powers of supervision over the legality of conduct of preliminary investigation agencies, as well as a significant part of the powers in the stage of initiation a criminal case. Deficiency of powers of the prosecutor in a stage of institution of criminal case now creates a problem for supervision over initiation of criminal cases. At the same time, the lack of the prosecutor powers of supervision over the legality of the preliminary investigation at the present time creates the problem of supervision over observance of constitutional rights and freedoms of a person and citizen, the problem of supervision decisions that lead to the formation of charges and the progress of criminal proceedings. The author concludes that the scope of the prosecutor’s powers to supervise the institution and investigation of criminal cases as a legal remedy for the protection of public interest can not be made dependent on the form of the preliminary investigation, and proposes the amendments and additions to the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, aimed at strengthening the role of the prosecutor in the procedure of institution and investigation of criminal cases.

The article argues that in cases, when the place of occurrence is a dwelling or other premises, the inspection may be made there, with observance of all the guarantees for persons living in this dwelling. Special emphasis is given to the procedure of suppression of documents and matters that are germane to the case. The author argues that for the suppression in the course of pre-trial investigation no search and seizure can be carried out. The article states that the Amendments made to the Russian Federation Code of Criminal Procedure, amended by Federal Law No. 23-FZ dated 04.03.2013, clearly underline that the materials of the preliminary investigation obtained not as a result of investigative activities, can also be used as case evidences. The article argues that in cases, when the place of occurrence is a dwelling or other premises, the inspection may be made there, with observance of all the guarantees for persons living in this dwelling. Special emphasis is given to the procedure of suppression of documents and matters that are germane to the case. The author argues that for the suppression in the course of pre-trial investigation no search and seizure can be carried out. The article states that the Amendments made to the Russian Federation Code of Criminal Procedure, amended by Federal Law No. 23-FZ dated 04.03.2013, clearly underline that the materials of the preliminary investigation obtained not as a result of investigative activities, can also be used as case evidences.

This article deals with the essence and grounds for drawing up the indictment as the final act of pre-trial proceedings, which determines the direction of the criminal case for subsequent consideration in court. Methodologically based on the general doctrinal approaches to the adoption of procedural decisions, the authors do not differentiate the envisaged part of Art. 215 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation for the conclusion of the preliminary investigation and drawing up of the indictment, considering them no more than different stages of the adoption of the same procedural decision. In addition, the authors believe that the validity of the indictments directly depends on the personal qualities of the modern investigator: a developed sense of justice, a legal understanding and a high level of personal responsibility.

The article deals with certain violations committed by jurors in the exercise of their rights and duties, starting with the stage of formation of the jury and ending with the verdict of the jury; it is noted that the consequences of the cancellation of the verdict (given the violations) may be due to the behavior of the professional participants in the process (for example, the presiding judge) and the time of the detection of such violations (before or after the verdict). The article also provides explanations for certain provisions of the criminal procedure law and provides an analysis of the practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

The Judicial reform of 1864 was based on enforcing new Regulations. It is no doubt that the Regulations of Criminal proceedings had been a great property of Russian law and gave a huge impact on European law as well.

The article is devoted to the identification and study of the peculiarities of the implementation of the adversarial principle in the appeal proceedings to review decisions of the court on application of compulsory measures of a medical nature. Focuses on special procedural status of the person in respect of whom the issue on application of compulsory measures of a medical character, and also the conclusion about the impact of this status on the nature of competition in the court of second instance for cases specified category. The article presents the data of official statistics of the Judicial Department under the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and analyzes the jurisprudence on the question of appellate review of judicial decisions on cases on application of compulsory measures of a medical nature. The author critically explains the norms of the current criminal procedure legislation regulating the proceedings in the court of second instance, and formulates proposals aimed at their improvement.

The article is devoted to the problematic issues of interpreter’s participation in criminal proceedings. The work noted that the participation of an interpreter allows to ensure the implementation of the principle of the language of criminal justice. The main attention in the work is given to the definition of the translator’s qualification and the solution of the problem of finding translators from rare languages that do not have written or malo-written languages. The authors proposed to create specialized forensic and translation organizations that can fill the existing organizational and legal gap. The article investigates the criminal procedure legislation of Japan, according to which an interpreter and a translator can be involved in the case. It is suggested that, with a large volume of procedural documents subject to transfer to participants in criminal proceedings, an interpreter should be involved, who will translate these documents.

The article is devoted to questions about the objectification of evidence in criminal proceedings, caused by the development of scientific and technical throught and the introduction into the investigative and judicial practice of progressive information technologies, the author explores the prerequisites and prospects for introducing the idea into the text of the law and the peculiarities of its implementation in judicial practice. The study conclusions and proposals to improve legislation.

Axiology, as a scientific theory of value, as a binding objective criterion takes the factors contributing to the further development of society and man as a person and belonging to him from birth rights such as life, freedom, honor, dignity.

The article is devoted to the consideration of the essence and boundaries of the legal secret in criminal proceedings. The author considers the normative regulation of this issue and the discussion points of view that exist in the doctrine of the criminal process regarding the necessary legislative guarantees of the lawyer’s secrets and the problems of its implementation.

The article is dedicated to the memory of my scientific Director Yuri Kuzmich Orlov, whose professional interests are touched upon issues of proof. The article discusses the problem of unification of administrative-procedural and criminal-procedural form when proving the factual circumstances forming the basis for qualification of actions of the driver of the vehicle according to article 264.1 of the criminal code, because the collection of evidence at the initial stage of the cases in this category typically is in the order of proceedings on administrative offense.

The article compares the institution of the return of the criminal case to the prosecutor with the institutions of the return of the claim, leaving the claim without movement and leaving the claim without consideration, performing similar tasks in the civil procedure. The author analyzes objectives of these institutions, the reasons for their application and their legal nature. It is concluded that, despite a certain similarity, these institutions have many differences due to the tasks of each type of legal procedure. According the results of the research the author comes to the conclusion about presence of deviations from the adversarial principle and the principle of the equality of the parties in the modern legal regulation of the institute of the return of the criminal case to the prosecutor.

The article gives a brief analysis of the phenomenon «favoured» in the law and examples of its impact on criminal procedure legal relations in the legislation of some foreign countries, such as Japan, Germany, USA. The author demonstrates that the filling of the phenomenon «favoured» with concrete normative elements depends upon understanding of public interest in a particular state.

The article explores the forms of influence of the media space on the jury trial on the basis of foreign scientific sources. The author attributes to these types of influence: the formation of a specific behavioral model and jurors’ approach to the evaluation of evidence, obtaining information about a case not included in the trial process, providing a convenient resource for illegal communication between juries and parties or with other persons. The existence of such risks is minimized by the adoption of comprehensive measures that have been tested in a number of countries, such as legal norms, regulating media activities, introduction the responsibility for the publication materials that are detrimental to the fairness of the trial, and jurors’ responsibility for searching this information, as well as the resolution of these problems by improving guarantees, provided by the criminal procedure legislation. The latter methods include: streamlining the procedure of jury selection, improving the quality of instructions of the presiding judge, increasing the cognitive availability of the process, and creating optimal conditions for passing a fair verdict based on evidence (putting additional materials to the advisory room), and restricting access to the Internet.