INTERPRETATION AS A PART OF SYSTEM OF EVIDENCES IN CRIMINAL CASES
( Pp. 154-156)

Task: The task of this article is to analyze the problems of permissibility of persons’ interpretations, received during the pre-inquisitional trial of reports on crimes as evidences in criminal cases. Relevancy: In this article, the question of a possibility to use interpretations as adequate evidences, is examined, forasmuch the Federal Law №23 (article 144) from 04th march 2013 provides a right to receive persons’ interpretations as well as a possibility of using information, contained in interpretations, as evidences in criminal cases. In the mean time, the order of conducting such a procedure lawfully is lacking. These circumstances create certain doubts in interpretation’s juridical nature, involve valid pleadings on recognizing such evidences inadmissible. Conclusions: An interpretation cannot be considered as adequate evidence in criminal cases, therefore these documents cannot be referred to in a judicial sentence.

Mamedov O.Y., (2016), INTERPRETATION AS A PART OF SYSTEM OF EVIDENCES IN CRIMINAL CASES. Gaps in Russian Legislation, 2 => 154-156.

Bykov V.M. Novyy zakon o poryadke rassmotreniya sledovatelem i doznavatelem soobshcheniya o prestuplenii//Rossiyskaya YUstitsiya. 2013. №5 S.27; Balakshin V.S. Ob yasnenie kak dokazatel stvo v ugolovnom i administrativnom sudoproizvodstve//Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal. 2012. №5. S.124-126; Grigor ev A.I. Dopustimost ob yasneniy v kachestve dokazatel stv po ugolovnomu delu//Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal. 2013. №5. S.145-148.
Dolya E. Pravovoe znachenie rezul tatov glasnykh operativno-rozysknykh meropriyatiy dlya ugolovnogo dela i reformy ugolovnogo protsessa.//Zakonnost . 2011. №4 S.16-22.
Dolya E. Pravovoe znachenie rezul tatov glasnykh operativno-rozysknykh meropriyatiy dlya ugolovnogo dela i reformy ugolovnogo protsessa.//Zakonnost . 2011. №4 S.16-22.
Kravets I.P. Organizatsiya pervonachal nogo i posleduyushchego etapa rassledovaniya prestupleniy, svyazannykh s terroristicheskimi aktami, sovershennymi posredstvom vzryvov//Probely v rossiyskom zakonodatel stve. №1. 2015. S.195-199.
Ovsyannikov I.V. Rassmotrenie soobshcheniya o prestuplenii. Protsessual nye i kriminalisticheskie problemy. Nauchno-prakticheskoe posobie. M. YURlit inform. 2010. S.85.
Opredelenie Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF ot 28 maya 2013 goda №723-O Ob otkaze v prinyatii k rassmotreniyu zhaloby grazhdanina ZHudina Sergeya Semenovicha na narushenie ego konstitutsionnykh prav punktom 6 chasti vtoroy stat i 74, punktom 1 chasti tret ey stat i 413 i polozheniyami glavy 40 Ugolovno-protsessual nogo kodeksa Rossiyskoy Federatsii //SPS Konsul tant-Plyus . Data obrashcheniya 24 fevralya 2016 goda
Panokin A.M. Poryadok rassmotreniya soobshcheniya o prestuplenii v ugolovnom protsesse//Aktual nye problemy rossiyskogo prava. 2013. №11. SPS Konsul tant Plyus . Data obrashcheniya 25 fevralya 2016 goda.
Terekhin V.V. Dopustimost materialov proverki kak dokazatel stv.//Rossiyskiy Sledovatel . 2013. №13 SPS Konsul tant Plyus . Data obrashcheniya 25 fevralya 2016 goda.
N.S. Trusova. Osobennosti dokazyvaniya pri rassledovanii prestupleniy protiv polovoy neprikosnovennosti//Probely v rossiyskom zakonodatel stve. №3. 2015. S.144-149.
CHurkin A.V. Dopustimost v ugolovnom protsesse ob yasneniy kak novykh dokazatel stv//Rossiyskiy Sledovatel . 2013. №17. SPS Konsul tant Plyus . Data obrashcheniya 24 fevralya 2016 goda.
CHurkin A.V. Eshche raz k voprosu ob ob yasneniyakh kak novykh dokazatel stvakh//Rossiyskiy Sledovatel . 2015. №3. SPS Konsul tant Plyus . Data obrashcheniya 24 fevralya 2016 goda.
SHalumov M.S. Ispol zovanie materialov, sobrannykh do vozbuzhdeniya ugolovnogo dela, v kachestve dokazatel stv//Ugolovnyy protsess. 2005. №3. S.32.

explanation, preliminary examination of a crime report, proof, criminal case.