Главная страницаZaki.ru законы и право Поиск законов поиск по сайту Каталог документов каталог документов Добавить в избранное добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
юридическая консультацияПолучите бесплатную консультацию юриста на нашем сайте

goПравовые акты международные
goПравовые акты Российской Федерации

goПравовые акты СССР

goПравовые акты Москвы

goПравовые акты Санкт-Петербурга

goПравовые акты регионов

Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 15.07.2010 <Дело Владимир Кривоносов (Vladimir Krivonosov) против России» [англ.]



(Application No. 7772/04)


(Strasbourg, 15.VII.2010)

<*> This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Vladimir Krivonosov v. Russia,
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Nina {Vajic} <*>,
<*> Здесь и далее по тексту слова на национальном языке набраны латинским шрифтом и выделены фигурными скобками.

Anatoly Kovler,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and {Soren} Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 24 June 2010,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:


1. The case originated in an application (No. 7772/04) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ("the Convention") by a Russian national, Mr Vladimir Alekseyevich Krivonosov ("the applicant"), on 3 February 2004.
2. The applicant, who had been granted legal aid, was represented by Ms L. Rusakova, a lawyer practising in Rostov-on-Don. The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
3. On 22 September 2008 the President of the First Section decided to give notice of the application to the Government. It was also decided to examine the merits of the application at the same time as its admissibility (Article 29 § 1).


I. The circumstances of the case

4. The applicant was born in 1968 and lives in Taganrog, the Rostov Region.

A. Applicant's arrest, ensuing detention and conviction

5. On 18 December 1998 the applicant was arrested and allegedly beaten up by the police officers. On the same day he was remanded in custody on suspicion of robbery.
6. On 21 December 1998 the charges were brought against the applicant and he was provided with a legal-aid counsel.
7. On 14 March 2000 the applicant was released on a written undertaking not to leave the town.
8. On 13 June 2000 the Rostov Regional Court convicted the applicant of robbery and imposed a suspended sentence of five years' imprisonment on him. On 2 November 2000, however, the Supreme Court of Russia quashed the judgment on appeal and remitted the case for a retrial.
9. On 14 May 2001 the Rostov Regional Court convicted the applicant of fraud, kidnapping, illegal deprivation of liberty, extortion, burglary and theft and sentenced him to seven years and six months' imprisonment. The applicant was taken straight from the courtroom to the detention unit.
10. On 16 January 2002 the Supreme Court of Russia quashed the judgment of 14 May 2001 on appeal and remitted the case for a retrial. The Supreme Court held that the preventive measure applied to the applicant "should remain unchanged".
11. On 12 February 2002 the Rostov Regional Court listed the new trial hearing for 27 February 2002 and ordered that the preventive measure applied to the applicant "should remain unchanged".
12. On 1 July 2002 the Rostov Regional Court extended the applicant's detention until 1 October 2002.
"The defendants [the applican

Страницы: 1 2 3 ... 22 23 24


Опубликовать в своем блоге livejournal.com

0.2216 с