Admissibility and reliability of the evidence in criminal procedural law
( Pp. 144-149)
More about authors
Alexey P. Popov
Dr. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal L aw Disciplines and Forensic Expertise
Pyatigorsk State University
Pyatigorsk, Russian Federation Zinchenko Igor Anatolyevich kand. yurid. nauk, docent, docent kafedry gosudarstvenno-pravovyh disciplin
Moscow International University, Kaliningrad branch Popov Artem Alekseevich Cand.Sci.(Law), First Deputy General Director
LLC "TER-Engineering"
Moscow, Russia
Pyatigorsk State University
Pyatigorsk, Russian Federation Zinchenko Igor Anatolyevich kand. yurid. nauk, docent, docent kafedry gosudarstvenno-pravovyh disciplin
Moscow International University, Kaliningrad branch Popov Artem Alekseevich Cand.Sci.(Law), First Deputy General Director
LLC "TER-Engineering"
Moscow, Russia
Abstract:
Task: identification of the real role of the admissibility of evidence, its relationship with the property of admissibility of evidence in criminal procedural evidence Methods: dialectical, formal legal, comparative legal. Results: the authors are not inclined to include the property of reliability of evidence in criminal cases, in the composition of the legal properties that determine their admissibility. Subjects of proof have the right to accept or reject attributable factual data collected in accordance with the procedure established by law by the property of reliability, however, both of them appear in criminal cases as evidence.
How to Cite:
Alexey P.P., Zinchenko I.A., Popov A.A., (2021), ADMISSIBILITY AND RELIABILITY OF THE EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURAL LAW. Gaps in Russian Legislation, 1 => 144-149.
Reference list:
Gmyrko V.P., Zinchenko I.A. Paradoksy dokazatel stvennogo prava // Biblioteka kriminalista. Nauchnyy zhurnal. 2014. № 2 (13). S. 9-17.
ZHdanova YA.V. Problemy veroyatnogo i dostovernogo v ugolovno-protsessual nom dokazyvanii i ikh vliyanie na prinyatie otdel nykh protsessual nykh resheniy sledovateley: avtoref. dis. kand. yurid. nauk. Izhevsk, 2004. 35 s.
Ishmaeva T.P. Dostovernost dokazatel stv v ugolovnom protsesse // Vestnik CHelyabinskogo gos. un-ta. Ser. Pravo . 2016. T. 1. Vyp. 3. S. 81-85.
Komissarova YA.V. Problemy polucheniya, proverki i otsenki pokazaniya v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve: videolektsiya // Mezhdunarodnaya assotsiatsiya sodeystviya pravosudiyu / URL: http://www.iuaj.net/node/2821
Kostenko R.V. Novoe ponimanie sushchnosti dokazatel stv v rossiyskom ugolovnom protsesse // Biblioteka kriminalista. Nauchnyy zhurnal. 2013. № 4 (8). S. 170-183.
Mironov V.YU. Dostovernost dokazatel stv i ikh znachenie pri postanovlenii prigovora: avtoref. dis. kand. yurid. nauk. CHelyabinsk, 2005. 23 s.
Ovsyannikov I.V. Problema dostovernosti dokazatel stv v dokazatel stvennom prave Rossii // Sovremennoe pravo. 2004. № 7. S. 35-41.
Popov A.P. Usloviya optimizatsii tseli dokazyvaniya. Rezul taty ORD: rezervy optimizatsii USP // CHernye dyry v rossiyskom zakonodatel stve. 2006. № 2. S. 300-302.
Popov A.P., Popov A.A. Protsessual no-pravovaya priroda pokazaniy v ugolovnom protsesse: komparativistskiy vzglyad // Vestnik Kaliningradskogo filiala Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2015. № 1 (39). S. 43-46.
Popov A.P., Popova I.A., Zinchenko I.A. Problemy sovremennogo ugolovno-protsessual nogo dokazatel stvennogo prava: monografiya. Pyatigorsk: RIA na KMV, 2019. 196 s.
Popov A.P., Popova I.A. Reglamentatsiya rezul tatov operativno-razysknoy deyatel nosti v ugolovno-protsessual nom prave // Vestnik Kaliningradskogo filiala Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2013. № 1 (31). S. 7-11.
Popova I.A. Reglamentatsiya uchastiya spetsialista v ugolovnom protsesse: problemy i perspektivy // Vestnik Kaliningradskogo filiala Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2013. № 2 (32). S. 103-107.
Teoriya dokazatel stv v sovetskom ugolovnom protsesse / otv. red. N.V. ZHogin. - 2-e izd., perab. i dop. - M.: YUrid. lit., 1973. 736 s.
ZHdanova YA.V. Problemy veroyatnogo i dostovernogo v ugolovno-protsessual nom dokazyvanii i ikh vliyanie na prinyatie otdel nykh protsessual nykh resheniy sledovateley: avtoref. dis. kand. yurid. nauk. Izhevsk, 2004. 35 s.
Ishmaeva T.P. Dostovernost dokazatel stv v ugolovnom protsesse // Vestnik CHelyabinskogo gos. un-ta. Ser. Pravo . 2016. T. 1. Vyp. 3. S. 81-85.
Komissarova YA.V. Problemy polucheniya, proverki i otsenki pokazaniya v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve: videolektsiya // Mezhdunarodnaya assotsiatsiya sodeystviya pravosudiyu / URL: http://www.iuaj.net/node/2821
Kostenko R.V. Novoe ponimanie sushchnosti dokazatel stv v rossiyskom ugolovnom protsesse // Biblioteka kriminalista. Nauchnyy zhurnal. 2013. № 4 (8). S. 170-183.
Mironov V.YU. Dostovernost dokazatel stv i ikh znachenie pri postanovlenii prigovora: avtoref. dis. kand. yurid. nauk. CHelyabinsk, 2005. 23 s.
Ovsyannikov I.V. Problema dostovernosti dokazatel stv v dokazatel stvennom prave Rossii // Sovremennoe pravo. 2004. № 7. S. 35-41.
Popov A.P. Usloviya optimizatsii tseli dokazyvaniya. Rezul taty ORD: rezervy optimizatsii USP // CHernye dyry v rossiyskom zakonodatel stve. 2006. № 2. S. 300-302.
Popov A.P., Popov A.A. Protsessual no-pravovaya priroda pokazaniy v ugolovnom protsesse: komparativistskiy vzglyad // Vestnik Kaliningradskogo filiala Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2015. № 1 (39). S. 43-46.
Popov A.P., Popova I.A., Zinchenko I.A. Problemy sovremennogo ugolovno-protsessual nogo dokazatel stvennogo prava: monografiya. Pyatigorsk: RIA na KMV, 2019. 196 s.
Popov A.P., Popova I.A. Reglamentatsiya rezul tatov operativno-razysknoy deyatel nosti v ugolovno-protsessual nom prave // Vestnik Kaliningradskogo filiala Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2013. № 1 (31). S. 7-11.
Popova I.A. Reglamentatsiya uchastiya spetsialista v ugolovnom protsesse: problemy i perspektivy // Vestnik Kaliningradskogo filiala Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta MVD Rossii. 2013. № 2 (32). S. 103-107.
Teoriya dokazatel stv v sovetskom ugolovnom protsesse / otv. red. N.V. ZHogin. - 2-e izd., perab. i dop. - M.: YUrid. lit., 1973. 736 s.
Keywords:
evidence law, evidence, sources of evidence, reliability of evidence, admissibility of evidence.
