The institutes for combining and separating criminal cases allow regulating and coordinating the scope of investigative and judicial actions in the investigation of crimes and the examination of substantive materials. The CPC enshrines several grounds for their application. Let's consider them in more detail.
Complicity
Separation of a criminal case into a separate proceeding is carried out if it is assumed that the offense is committed in complicity in the cases provided for in paragraphs 1-4 1 of part 208 of the CPC article.
In these situations, it becomes necessary to suspend the preliminary investigation in relation to either an unidentified subject or a suspect / accused involved in a group crime. This condition of separation of the criminal case into a separate trial is consistent with the procedural logic of the movement of materials. It prevents unjustified delays in the administration of justice in cases involving objective obstacles to the investigation and resolution of the case against all persons involved in the crime.
Holding a minor accountable with an adult
This basis is enshrined in paragraph 2 of part 1 of article 154 of the CPC. The separation of the criminal case in this case allows you to neutralize the negative impact on the minor coming from adult partners. In this case, conditions are created for the implementation of a special procedure for the consideration of cases, as enshrined in Chapter 50 of the Code.
Presence of an insane participant
Separation of a criminal case into a separate proceeding in the case when an irresponsible subject is involved in the commission of a crime or a person has a mental illness after the end of the act, allows you to split the materials in two. In relation to sane citizens, the investigation will continue in the usual manner. As for the insane person or sick citizen, a special proceeding will be instituted on the application of medical coercive measures to him.
Lack of connection between crimes or citizens who committed them
The separation of criminal cases in such cases is more than justified. The fact is that we are talking about various entities that have committed crimes that are not related to each other. In other words, there are no grounds for combining the episodes within the framework of one production due to the fact that there are no common elements between them: neither facts, nor persons to be prosecuted.
However, this state of affairs does not immediately become clear: not at the time of the opening of production (otherwise several different cases would have been initiated), not at the decision to combine materials (otherwise it would not have been accepted at all). The need to highlight criminal cases becomes apparent during the investigation, in the process of collecting evidence.
It is unlikely that in such cases we can speak of an investigative error. Most likely, the need to separate out criminal cases is determined by the normal movement from the little-known or unknown (at the time the case was opened) to the known (according to the results of the investigation).
Availability of pre-trial agreement
This condition for the allocation of a criminal case was enshrined in law relatively recently. It is associated with the introduction of the institution of an agreement on cooperation with the investigation. In such cases, not only the legal proceedings themselves acquire specific features, but also the pre-trial proceedings preceding it.
It must be said that the question of whether the separation of a case with respect to a person who has concluded a cooperation agreement is considered optional or compulsory remains controversial.
If we take the prevailing position in practice regarding its mandatory nature, then it will be crucial that the preliminary investigation focuses not so much on identifying the circumstances of the crime according to the general rules of evidence as on the activity of the accused / suspect himself. The actions of this person should be aimed at fulfilling the obligations enshrined in the pre-trial agreement. Among them, in particular, assistance in the search for material assets, exposure of the remaining participants in the crime, assistance in the disclosure of the act.
Accordingly, the proceedings in the highlighted case will be reduced mainly to verification of the fulfillment by the subject of the obligations undertaken at the conclusion of the agreement. In such cases, production should be carried out in a simplified (expedited) manner.
At the same time, the institution of pre-trial cooperation by itself in modern conditions causes a lot of complaints, discrepancies in approaches to implementation and ambiguous assessments.
Short form of inquiry
Separation of a case is allowed in respect of individual accused / suspects, the investigation of which is carried out in the manner prescribed for the shortened form of inquiry. In this case, one important condition must be fulfilled. For other suspects / accused, a preliminary investigation should be conducted according to general rules.
The consolidation of this basis for highlighting a criminal case in the law is determined by the introduction of a simplified pre-trial trial with a limited list of facts to be proved.
conclusions
The presence of the above grounds in the procedural legislation is either related to individual circumstances requiring a change in the structure of further investigation by highlighting cases, or is determined by the peculiarities of the production involving the use of simplified forms. It should be said that these circumstances appear and become apparent in the investigation process.
Additional grounds
The procedural legislation also provides for other circumstances leading to the separation of cases. They are not related to the development of the preliminary investigation, but to the specifics of the subsequent trial. These grounds include:
- Committing an act in complicity when at least one of the suspects is a soldier or undergoing training. Criminal cases in relation to these entities are subject to military courts and, therefore, are subject to separation. However, if this is not possible, the priority in the proceedings remains with the military court.
- The commission of an act, the consideration of which may be carried out by a jury, if one or several of the accused at once expressed refusal of such proceedings. If criminal cases cannot be seized against such persons, the jury also has priority in the proceedings. The relevant provision follows from paragraph 1 of paragraph 5,217 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.
Procedure for the allocation of a criminal case
General rules can be formulated as follows.
Separation of a case is allowed by law, if this does not affect the objectivity and comprehensiveness of the investigation and trial. Examples include the multiplicity of episodes or a large amount of material. It should be borne in mind that this reservation applies exclusively to those grounds which are not caused by the objective need to divide production due to the lack of links between the elements provided for in paragraph 3 of paragraph 1 of part 154 of the CPC article. You also need to take into account that in other cases, the separation of cases always to a certain extent affects at least the comprehensiveness of the investigation. The fact is that this procedure is forced, however, a priori, undesirable. In this regard, the provision of part 2 of article 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be understood in such a way that separation of the case should be avoided if a comprehensive and objective investigation is almost or completely impossible.
The person conducting the proceedings has the right to isolate the case. The employee makes the appropriate procedural decision at his own discretion, taking into account the circumstances of the crime.
Materials of the segregated proceedings obtained in the course of a general investigation may be accepted as evidence. This is stated in part 5 of article 154 of the CPC.
The duration of the investigation of the segregated proceedings shall be calculated from the date of initiation of the case from which it was segregated. The corresponding rule is enshrined in part 6 of the article of the CPC.
Separation of criminal case materials into separate proceedings
This procedural action should be distinguished from the procedure discussed above.
The selection of materials from a criminal case is distinguished by the absence of a decision on the initiation of proceedings on the episode or on the fact of commission of the act. The beginning of the investigation is preceded by a decision to open a criminal case in a general manner. The investigator / interrogator, who has revealed during the investigation the signs of a “new" crime, does not independently decide to initiate proceedings. His duties include sending materials to the prosecutor or the head of the investigating authority.
Documents containing information about a new crime and separated from the proceedings on which they were collected can be used as part of the evidence base for a new case. This provision secures Part 2 of Article 155 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The calculation of the time limits for the production of a new case begins from the moment a decision is made on its initiation.
Documenting
In accordance with procedural legislation, an authorized employee must issue a decision on the separation of a criminal case. Certified copies of all investigative documents are attached to it. Certification of materials is a prerequisite for accepting evidence. In case of failure to comply with this requirement, the court has the right to declare them inadmissible.
In the decree, the authorized employee must indicate:
- Name of the body of inquiry (preliminary investigation), own rank (class rank), F. I. O.
- The number of the case from which the allocation is made.
- The essence of production (plot).
- Grounds for highlighting the case. The procedural action must be properly motivated.
- The text of the decision on the separation of the case.
- Surname, initials of the citizen in respect of which the procedural action is carried out.
- F. I. O. of the subject in respect of whom the case is open.
- The number assigned to the new production.
The document should also contain an indication that a copy of the decision was sent to the prosecutor if the case was allocated for the investigation of a new act or in relation to a new subject.
The legislation does not spell out the duty of an authorized employee to reflect information about which materials were highlighted in copies and which in originals.
A copy of the decision must be attached to the case from which the allocation was made. The original must be filed into a new business. The procedural law does not require an act to open a new case. It is considered to be excited from the date of its allocation, provided that the relevant resolution contains a decision on it, adopted in accordance with the provisions of article 146 of the CPC.
The law does not allow the separation of cases by the inquiry bodies for crimes for which a preliminary investigation is mandatory.
Connection of affairs
It involves the formation of a single proceeding for two or more crimes. Cases on such acts are instituted, as a rule, at different times and often by different authorities.
Connection is allowed solely on the grounds provided for by procedural legislation. These include the following circumstances:
- The accusation of several persons of complicity in one or more acts. An investigation of a crime committed by several entities within the framework of a single proceeding allows one to correctly determine the roles of participants and correctly qualify their actions.
- The accusation of one citizen of committing several assaults.
Joining of cases is also allowed in case of concealment of crimes not promised in advance or failure to report about them. Separate investigation and trial of such acts is not possible due to the fact that the concomitant encroachment can be committed if the existence of a basic fact is proven.
Joining of affairs is carried out on the basis of the decision of the authority conducting the production of one of them. According to general rules, the materials join the case in which an investigation of a more serious crime is being conducted or for which a larger amount of work has been performed.
The term of the investigation begins to flow from the date of initiation of the first proceedings.
Bans
In order to avoid violation of the rights of suspects and accused, it is unacceptable to combine the same charges against different persons, cases, proceedings on one of which are conducted privately, and on the other - in public. Any other charges cannot be combined, the joint trial of which could negatively affect the objectivity and comprehensiveness of the consideration.