Appropriate Correspondence with the Needs of Enforcement Practice: Myth or Reality
https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2019.107.10.134-141
Abstract
The modern features of the formation of judicial investigative and prosecutorial and supervisory practice are analyzed, attention is focused on how the decisions of the highest court exert influence on these processes. The authors analyze the shortcomings of the decisions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 25, 2018 No. 46 “On some issues of judicial practice in cases of crimes against constitutional rights and freedoms of man and citizen (Articles 137, 138, 138.1, 139, 144.1, 145, 145.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation )» and dated November 29, 2018 No. 41 “On judicial practice in criminal cases concerning violations of labor protection requirements, safety rules during construction or other works, or industrial safety requirements of hazardous production facilities”.
About the Authors
N. A. Danilova
St. Petersburg Law Institute (Branch) of the University of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Natalya A. Danilova, Dr. of Sci. (Law), Professor, Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics
44 pr. Liteiny, St. Petersburg, 191014
M. A. Grigoryeva
St. Petersburg Law Institute (Branch) of the University of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Maria A. Grigoryeva, Cand. of Sci. (Law), Docent, Associate Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics
44 pr. Liteiny, St. Petersburg, 191014
References
1. Bezborodov D. A. O nekotoryh osobennostyah primeneniya ugolovnogo zakona v sluchae narusheniya pravil bezopasnosti pri vedenii stroitel’nyh rabot // Kriminalist”. — 2014. — № 2 (15). — S. 17—21.
2. Demidov V. V. O roli i znachenii postanovlenij Plenuma Verhovnogo Suda Rossijskoj Federacii // Byulleten’ Verhovnogo Suda RF. — 1998. — № 3. — S. 21—24.
3. Dubrovskij D. S. Termin «stroitel’nye raboty» kak element ponyatijnogo apparata sledovatelya i sudebnogo eksperta // Teoriya i praktika sudebnoj ekspertizy. — 2013. — № 4 (32). — S. 44—47.
4. Kommentarij k Ugolovnomu kodeksu Rossijskoj Federacii : postatejnyj : v 2 t. / pod red. A. V. Brilliantova. — 2-e izd. — M. : Prospekt, 2015.
5. Mad’yarova A. V. Raz"yasneniya Verhovnogo Suda Rossijskoj Federacii v mekhanizme ugolovno-pravovogo regulirovaniya. — SPb. : Yuridicheskij centr-Press, 2002. — 405 s.
6. Naumov A. A. Problemy razgranicheniya sostavov prestuplenij, predusmotrennyh st. 143 i 216 UK RF // Vestnik Kemerovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. — 2015. — № 2 (62). — T. 2. — S. 188—192.
7. Ulez’ko I. S. Razgranichenie prestupleniya, predusmotrennogo st. 216 UK RF, ot smezhnyh sostavov prestuplenij // Zakonodatel’stvo i praktika. — 2011. — № 1 (26). — S. 49—52.
Review
For citations:
Danilova N.A., Grigoryeva M.A. Appropriate Correspondence with the Needs of Enforcement Practice: Myth or Reality. Actual Problems of Russian Law. 2019;(10):134-141. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2019.107.10.134-141
Views:
561
Email this article 