UDK 342.4 Конституции. Основы конституций: политические, социальные, экономические. Составление и изменение конституций. Сборники отчетов о заседаниях, акты и т.д. учредительных собраний относятся к разделу 328
The interpretation of the criminal procedural provisions allows us to state the possibility of obtaining a specialist’s opinion by the defender, followed by its presentation as evidence for evaluation and verification by the investigator (inquirer) and the court. However, at the moment, in the practice of the defender, there are cases of refusal on the part of the investigating authorities and the court to attach the conclusions of specialists to the criminal case, justifying this by their critical attitude to their conclusions and denying the significance of their conclusions as evidence by the criterion of admissibility. The purpose of this study is to analyze the problems of attracting a specialist to participate in criminal proceedings in the field of economic crimes. The following methods of cognition were used: general (synthesis, analysis, deduction, induction, observation and comparison, extrapolation, interpolation); general scientific (structural and system analysis);special (legal modeling, formal legal, comparative legal). As a result, the study revealed the problems of attracting a specialist to participate in criminal proceedings. As a result of the non-regulation of the specialist’s activities in the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and the presence of a large number of issues, judicial and investigative practice follows the only possible path in this situation - refusal to consider the expert’s conclusion as full-fledged evidence and the latter, in most cases, is not used when making decisions on criminal cases, in their investigation and consideration.
defender, specialist, criminal proceedings, criminal proceedings, criminal procedure, participant, defense.
1. Anesheva A. T. Situations of obtaining the opinion of a specialist and testimony of a specialist // Society and Law. 2022. No. 4 (82). P. 26–30. (In Russ.)
2. Bufetova M. Sh., Demeshko I. V. The conclusion of a specialist as evidence of the defense: urgent problems of theory and practice // Law practice. 2019. No. 3. P. 3–6. (In Russ.)
3. Davletov A. A., Charykov A. V. Does the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation “curtail” the right of adefense lawyer to involve a specialist in a judicial investigation? // Russian judge. 2022. No. 1. P. 60–64. (In Russ.)
4. Rossinsky S. B., Rasulova N. S. Expert opinion and expert opinion as a means of proof in criminal proceedings: what are the criteria for their differentiation? // Bulletin of the Ural Law Institute of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia. Law. 2022. No. 2 (34). pp. 15–20. (In Russ.)
5. Vedishchev N. P. Participation of a specialist in the consideration of a criminal case. What the defender should consider // Criminal procedure. 2021. No. 5(197). P. 41–49. (In Russ.)
6. Orlov A. A. Conclusions and testimony of an expert and a specialist as evidence in the criminal process // Bulletin. State and law. 2022. No. 1(32). P. 69–73. (In Russ.)
7. Kronov E. V. Conclusion of a specialist in the activities of a defender // Lawyer. 2009. No. 11. P. 64–73. (In Russ.)
8. Karsanov R. E. Some problems of preparing the investigator for the interrogation of the suspect and the accused // Scientific aspect. 2021. V. 7. No. 2. P. 755–758. (In Russ.)
9. Rychkalova L. A. Problems of tactics of interrogation of the suspect and the accused // Society and law. 2014. No. 4 (50). P. 205–211. (In Russ.)
10. Tarasov A. A. Expert and specialist in criminal proceedings: monograph. Moscow, 2017. 125 p. (In Russ.)
11. Grigoriev V.P. Features of attracting a specialist to participate in investigative actions // Bulletin of Vladimir State University. 2015. No. 6. P. 71–76. (In Russ.)
12. Stukalin I. V. On the issue of individual rights and obligations of a specialist and an expert // Collection of materials of forensic readings. 2018. No. 15. P. 88–89. (In Russ.)
13. Perekhozheva E. S. Delimitation of the expert’s competences from the activities of other participants in the criminal procedure according to the level of solving expert tasks // Symbol of Science. 2020. No. 5. P. 162–165. (In Russ.)
