The procedure for the revision entered into force sentences imposed on persons who have signed a pre-trial agreement on cooperation
( Pp. 147-151)

Backgrond. To determine the appropriate procedure for the review of sentences handed down in respect of persons who have signed a pre-trial agreement on cooperation in the event of an intentional message of false information or deliberate concealment of material information. Methods - based on the general scientific dialectical method, as well as chastnonauchnogo methods of knowledge: system, structural-functional, formal-logical methods (analysis, synthesis, concretization, analogy, simulation) conclusions about the proper procedure for the review of sentences handed down in respect of persons who have signed pre- an agreement on cooperation in the event of an intentional message of false information or deliberate concealment of material information. Results - based on an analysis of criminal procedural law and practice concludes that the revision entered into force court decisions against a person who has entered into a pre-trial agreement on cooperation and intentionally reported false information and (or) silent about important circumstances having to the case, if it is established following the appointment of his sentence, as well as in respect of the above persons in case the court decides otherwise, regarding the qualification of the offense, the scope of the charges and other important circumstances with regard to its partners, can only be done by the rules of Chapter 49 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation - in view of newly discovered circumstances. The revision in the order of Chapter 49 Code of Criminal Procedure entered into force sentence for cases heard in the order fast production is possible under the following independent grounds: - Establishment of an intentional false declaration or intentional concealment of the consequences of any material information by a person who has concluded a pre-trial agreement on cooperation, which led to the decision of the illegal, unreasonable or unjust sentences imposed by unlawful or unjustified ruling or order; - Inconsistency judgment in a particular order against a person who has entered into a pre-trial agreement on cooperation, judicial decision taken in respect of his accomplices for the crime in the general order in respect of the qualifying volume charges and other relevant circumstances. Scope of the study - the main article can be used for improvement of criminal procedural law and pravoprimenietelnoy activities of vessels in the research activities at the teaching and learning of the criminal procedure law. The practical importance - the main conclusions of the article may be used for proper application by the courts of criminal procedural legislation governing the review of sentences handed down in respect of persons who have signed a pre-trial agreement on cooperation in the event of an intentional message of false information or deliberate concealment of material information. Originality/value - the first time in the article are determined by the independent review of the base in the order of Chapter 49 Code of Criminal Procedure entered into force sentence for cases heard in respect of persons who have signed pre-trial agreement on cooperation and informed at the same time false information or keep silent about the important circumstances of the case. The main provisions of the work may be used in research in the field of criminal procedural law, the preparation of monographs and textbooks, implementation of dissertation research on the issue. The findings can also be used in the teaching and learning of criminal procedural law teachers, students, undergraduates, graduate students.

Kachalova O.V., (2015), THE PROCEDURE FOR THE REVISION ENTERED INTO FORCE SENTENCES IMPOSED ON PERSONS WHO HAVE SIGNED A PRE-TRIAL AGREEMENT ON COOPERATION. Gaps in Russian Legislation, 5 => 147-151.

Abshilava G. V. Ob osobom poryadke sudebnogo razbiratel stva po ugolovnomu delu v otnoshenii obvinyaemogo, s kotorym zaklyucheno dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve.// Probely v rossiyskom zakonodatel stve. 2010, №3.
Abshilava G. V. Rassmotrenie sudom ugolovnogo dela, po kotoromu bylo zaklyucheno dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve.// Biznes v zakone, 2011, №4.
Alimirzaev A. A. O vozmozhnosti sokrashcheniya dokazyvaniya v ramkakh protsedury zaklyucheniya dosudebnogo soglasheniya o sotrudnichestve.// Probely v rossiyskom zakonodatel stve, 2013, №4.
Bagautdinov F.N., Belyaev M.V. Novoe osnovanie dlya vozobnovleniya proizvodstva vvidu novykh ili vnov otkryvshikhsya obstoyatel stv. //Rossiyskaya yustitsiya, 2014, N 8.
Bezlepkin B. T. Kommentariy k st. 317.8 UPK RF. //Kommentariy k Ugolovno-protsessual nomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 11-e izdanie, pererabotannoe i dopolnennoe. M., 2012. // SPS Konsul tant Plyus.
Velikiy D. P. Dosudebnoe soglashenie o sotrudnichestve v rossiyskom ugolovnom protsesse.//ZHurnal rossiyskogo prava, 2010, N 2.
Davydov V. A. Kommentariy k glave 49 UPK RF. Nauchno-prakticheskiy kommentariy k UPK RF. Pod red. V. M. Lebedeva. - M. 2014
Dikarev I. S. Vozvrashchenie sudom ugolovnogo dela prokuroru v svyazi s vyyavleniem novykh obstoyatel stv. //Zakonnost quot;, 2014, N 1.
Selina E. V. Implementatsiya narozhdayushchikhsya pravovykh institutov v slozhivshuyusya ugolovno-protsessual nuyu formu: problemy, perspektivy, tendentsii.// Rossiyskaya yustitsiya, 2014, N 8.
Smirnov A. V. Kommentariy k st. 317.8 UPK RF.//Nauchno-prakticheskiy kommentariy k UPK RF. Pod red. A. V. Smirnova. 2012 //SPS Konsul tant Plyus.
Filatova M. A. Otmena vstupivshikh v zakonnuyu silu sudebnykh aktov po vnov otkryvshimsya obstoyatel stvam: otsenka Evropeyskogo suda i rossiyskaya praktika.//Standarty spravedlivogo pravosudiya. Pod red. T. G. Morshchakovoy. - M.: Mysl , 2012 - 583 c.

pre-trial agreement on cooperation, production due to new and newly discovered circumstances, a review of the sentence, convicted, the base of the revision of the sentence.