graduate student from 01.01.2021 to 01.01.2025
Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy, Kamchatka, Russian Federation
Introduction. In modern Russian criminal proceedings, issues related to the appointment and conduct of forensic examinations, including in non-governmental (non-departmental) expert institutions and by private experts, remain of great importance. This area of activity is becoming especially relevant today due to the rapid development of science and technology, crafts and art, as well as the emergence of new methods for conducting expert research. Competent actions of the investigator when appointing a forensic examination in a criminal case are the key to a successful investigation, establishing all the circumstances of the crime committed that need to be proven, and solving crime prevention problems. When appointing a forensic examination, the investigator must build effective interaction with expert institutions and experts, which contributes to compliance with a reasonable period of preliminary investigation and ensuring the rights and legitimate interests of participants in the criminal process. Methods. The analysis of the features of the investigator's activities when appointing forensic examinations in non-governmental (non-departmental) expert institutions was carried out on the basis of a study of criminal case materials. The study also used the method of logical analysis of the norms of the current legislation. Results. The study allowed to determine the relevance of further study of the problem of assignment of expert examinations to non-governmental (non-departmental) expert institutions and private experts. The article presents the author's position on the positive and negative aspects of using special knowledge in the framework of forensic examinations, assigned not only to state expert institutions. Based on the results of the study, techniques for ensuring the most effective interaction of the investigator with expert institutions and private experts when assigning an examination in a criminal case were developed and proposed for practical use. Typical errors of investigative bodies in the implementation of this type of activity are analyzed, and ways to solve them are considered.
Investigation of crimes, investigator, expert, interaction, assignment of forensic examination, criminal proceedings, forensic research.
1. Zinin A.M., Goryanov Yu.I. Ispol'zovaniye instituta sudebnoy ekspertizy v usloviyakh realizatsii printsipa sostyazatel'nosti v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve // Lex Russica (Russkiy zakon). 2005. T. 64. № 3. S. 497-513.
2. Yurova K.I., Gurin A.A. Ponyatiye sudebnoy ekspertizy v ugolovnom protsesse // Fundamental'nyye i prikladnyye nauchnyye issledovaniya: aktual'nyye voprosy, dostizheniya i innovatsii. Penza, 2017. S. 91-93.
3. Demidova T.V. Problemnyye voprosy naznacheniya sudebnykh ekspertiz // Vestnik ekonomicheskoy bezopasnosti. 2016. № 4. S. 29-32.
4. Sergeyev V.V., Skomorokhov O.N. O nekotorykh problemakh organizatsii proizvodstva sudebnykh ekspertiz v negosudarstvennykh ekspertnykh uchrezhdeniyakh i chastnymi ekspertami // Pravo: istoriya i sovremennost'. 2021. № 3 (16). S. 124-130.
5. Stepanov K.V., Malina M.A. Problemy ispol'zovaniya v ugolovnom protsesse zaklyucheniya spetsialista, a takzhe rezul'tatov sudebnykh ekspertiz negosudarstvennykh sudebno-ekspertnykh uchrezhdeniy // Vestnik yuridicheskogo fakul'teta Yuzhnogo federal'nogo universiteta. 2022. T. 9. № 4. S. 144-148.
6. Lazareva L.V. Osobennosti naznacheniya v ugolovnom protsesse sudebnykh ekspertiz v negosudarstvennyye sudebno-ekspertnyye uchrezhdeniya // Sudebnyye ekspertizy v ugolovnom protsesse: teoriya i praktika. Materialy vserossiyskoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. M., 2023. S. 125-130.
7. Ivanova Ye.V. Kvalifikatsiya sudebnogo eksperta i yeye formal'noye podtverzhdeniye // Kriminologicheskiy zhurnal. 2024. № 1. S. 61-66.
8. Nerozina S.Yu., Shal'nev O.G., Klyuyeva A.Yu., Merkulova Ye.V. Rol' i deyatel'nost' negosudarstvennykh ekspertnykh uchrezhdeniy pri proizvodstve sudebnoy ekspertizy // Bezopasnost' stroitel'nogo fonda Rossii. Problemy i resheniya. Materialy Mezhdunarodnykh akademicheskikh chteniy. Kursk, 2020. S. 276-282.
9. Aristarkhov A.L. Puti ustraneniya trudnostey proizvodstva sudebnoy ekspertizy v usloviyakh realizatsii printsipa sostyazatel'nosti storon // Vestnik Universiteta prokuratury Rossiyskoy Federatsii. 2022. № 4 (90). S. 41-49.
10. Pleshakov S.M. Opredeleniye pravovogo statusa negosudarstvennykh ekspertnykh organizatsiy // Rol' i znacheniye nauki v vuze i yeye vliyaniye na obrazovatel'nyy protsess. Materialy Mezhdunarodnoy zaochnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. Saransk, 2020. S. 440-443.
11. Mandarkhanova L.M. Posledovatel'nost' naznacheniya sudebnykh ekspertiz v khode rassledovaniya neochevidnykh dorozhno-transportnykh prestupleniy // Aktual'nyye problemy kriminalistiki i sudebnoy ekspertizy. Sbornik materialov mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii. Irkutsk: VSI MVD Rossii, 2024. S. 56-59.
12. Belyakov A.A., Tsvetkova A.D. Sledstvennyye oshibki pri naznachenii sudebnykh ekspertiz // Akademicheskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal. 2024. T. 25. № 1 (95). S. 124-132.
13. Aminev F.G. Po voprosu o taktike naznacheniya sudebnykh ekspertiz pri rassledovanii prestupleniy, svyazannykh s ekstremizmom i terrorizmom // Yurist"-Pravoved". 2017. № 4 (83). S. 74-78.
14. Rossinskaya Ye.R. Voprosy sovershenstvovaniya zakonodatel'stva o sudebnoy ekspertize // Rossinskaya Ye.R. Izbrannoye. M.: Norma, 2019. S. 361-378.
15. Mishin A.V., Mazurenko P.N Aktual'nyye problemy naznacheniya i proizvodstva sudebnoy ekspertizy // Vestnik ekonomiki, prava i sotsiologii. 2017. № 1. S. 86-89.
16. Neupokoyeva I.A. Naznacheniye sudebnoy fonoskopicheskoy ekspertizy pri rassledovanii moshennichestva s ispol'zovaniyem informatsionno-kommunikatsionnykh tekhnologiy // Zakon i pravo. 2021. № 3. S. 158-160.
