Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 21.10.2010 «Дело Марьин (Maryin) против России» [англ.]

Supreme Court quashed the appeal judgment of 3 December 2003 and remitted the case for fresh consideration on 12 February 2004.
10. The Supreme Court suspended consideration of the applicant's appeal and assigned the President of the Supreme Court to verify the lawfulness of the lay assessors' participation in the applicant's trial on 10 March 2004. On 14 April 2004 the Supreme Court considered the applicant's appeal and upheld his conviction. The court noted that the trial had been conducted in accordance with the rules of criminal procedure.
11. Following the applicant's request for supervisory review, the Presidium of the Supreme Court quashed the judgment of 14 April 2004 and remitted the case for fresh consideration on 8 July 2004.
12. On 1 September 2004 the Supreme Court quashed the judgment of 2 October 2003 on appeal and remitted the matter for fresh consideration to the Proletarskiy District Court of Saransk.
13. The District Court found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to five years' imprisonment on 20 December 2004. On 9 March 2005 the Supreme Court upheld the judgment of 20 December 2004 on appeal.

3. The third set of criminal proceedings

14. On 26 May 2005 the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Mordoviya quashed the appeal judgment of 9 March 2005 by way of supervisory review and remitted the case for fresh consideration. The court noted that the appellate court had failed to assess the admissibility of the victim's testimonies.
15. A new consideration of the applicant's appeal by the Supreme Court on 29 June 2005 resulted in the quashing of the judgment of 20 December 2004. The matter was remitted to the lower court for fresh consideration.
16. On 25 October 2005 the District Court found the applicant guilty as charged and sentenced him to five years' imprisonment. The court based its findings on the witnesses' testimonies, including those provided by the victim, who testified in court, and on forensic evidence. The court further ordered the applicant to pay for the services provided by a legal-aid lawyer in the amount of 5,220 Russian roubles. On 15 March 2006 the Supreme Court upheld the applicant's conviction on appeal, but reduced his sentence to three years' imprisonment.

B. The applicant's detention

1. The applicant's detention in a correctional colony

17. From 30 December 2003 to August 2004 the applicant was detained in a correctional colony. Some of his belongings were allegedly stolen during his transport to the colony. On 17 August 2004 the administration of the colony refused to investigate the applicant's allegations.
18. On 3 February 2004 the applicant had an altercation with another inmate. According to the applicant, he was beaten up by the guards for refusing to explain in writing the reasons for the altercation.
19. According to the applicant, on 9 July 2004 the administration of the colony allegedly refused to allow the applicant to meet his father, who represented him during the trial.

2. The incident of 30 July 2005
and the ensuing investigation

20. In August 2004 the applicant was transported to remand prison No. IZ-13/1 in Saransk.
21. Following the applicant's failure to comply with internal regulations, on 26 July 2005 he was placed in a disciplinary cell for seven days.
22. On 30 July 2005 the warden, his deputy and two guards inspected the prison. They noticed an inter-cell communications device in the applicant's cell. The applicant tried to prevent them from entering the cell. He pushed them and swore at them. L., one of the guards, hit the applicant three times with a rubber truncheon. The applicant gave up his res

> 1 2 3 ... 5 6 7