Resumption of criminal cases

GROUNDS FOR reopening of criminal cases grounds for reopening of criminal cases are one of the most characteristic features of this production control, which along with the subject mu- effective sentences, decisions and rulings, it vskichki differ from other forms of judicial review acts. Grounds as pre-formulated violations that call into doubt the legality, correctness and fairness of the judicial act stipulated, are the main feature of control and revocation proceedings. In the current PPC only such control cassation proceedings. When we talk about grounds for reopening of criminal cases should make the appointment on the grounds chl.422, paragraph 1, item 5 NPK- judgments, decisions and rulings, unverified by cassation complaint or protest of the country in whose interest comes cancellation and judicial acts in Article 354, paragraph 2, item 2 and para 5 CPP. When admitted significant breaches in chl.348, Paragraph 1, 1-3 PPC / cassation grounds /. This ground for reopening is radically different from the rest. Examination of that ground is inherently even within the institution of the resumption of criminal cases can be defined as '' kvazikasatsiya '' that resembles the control of judicial acts repealed review under supervision. 1. Reasons for regeneration, unlike other grounds in control proceedings are not contained in the work itself. This is the principal difference between them. These are facts unknown to the relevant decision-making body when it has dealt with the case. Their existence became known after the entry of Women judicial act into force, which is why they are not in the covers of the case. The impact of these newly discovered facts and circumstances on the agreed factual and legal findings effective sentences, decisions and rulings questioned their legality, which requires their verification and review. In the instance control violations contained in the pleadings and inspection their influence over the decisions of the lower court can be assessed and judicial akt- changed. 2. The second feature of the grounds for the resumption of their ignorance of the determining authority to challenge the verdict, the decision and the definition in force. No matter the resumed proceedings is the reason why they have become known to the court. The knowledge of their existence at a later time / after the entry into force of the judicial act / make them newly on the case and determining authority. So often in laws and legal theory speaks to resume due to newly discovered circumstances. 3. The time of occurrence of new circumstances towards the entry into force of the judicial act is irrelevant to institute the resumption of criminal cases. The important thing is that they were not known to the court and are essential to the findings in the verdict, decision or ruling. 4. In view of these characteristics grounds grounds for the resumption of criminal proceedings can be classified as unknown to the court facts and circumstances discovered after the entry into force of the sentence, the judgment or order which are not in the case file, in the presence of which is placed under samnennie legality, correctness and fairness of the stipulated judgment.