How is jurisdiction in a criminal case determined?

What cases are heard by courts of general jurisdiction?

Courts of general jurisdiction hear criminal, civil and administrative cases with the participation of citizens and organizations. Depending on the complexity of the case under consideration, a court of the appropriate level is appointed.

Justices of the peace have limited powers and consider minor cases using a simplified procedure.
District courts are courts of first instance, as well as an appellate instance when appealing decisions of the magistrate court. Their competence includes consideration of more complex and significant cases.
If the case under consideration is particularly serious and painstaking, it is submitted to the courts of second instance - regional and regional courts of general jurisdiction, as well as courts of federal cities .
The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation is the highest judicial body for civil cases, resolution of economic disputes, criminal, administrative cases and other cases within the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction.

The following claims are filed in a court of general jurisdiction:

on controversial civil, labor, family, housing and other issues
on collection of funds (tax arrears, alimony debt, unpaid wages, etc.)
about illegality or inaction of government bodies
on establishing any legal fact (incapacity of a citizen, adoption of children, etc.)

During 2011, citizens I. and B. committed crimes under paragraph “a” of Part 2 of Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (theft committed by a group of persons by prior conspiracy) in the cities of Samara, Ulyanovsk, Kazan. At the same time, they were detained in Kazan after committing another theft. During the preliminary investigation conducted by an investigator of the Kazan internal affairs bodies, it was established that most of the thefts by I. and B. were committed in Samara. To which court should a criminal case against these persons be sent for consideration on the merits? What determines the jurisdiction of this category of cases?

Lawyer Antonov A.P.

Good afternoon According to Article 32 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a criminal case is subject to consideration in court at the place where the crime was committed, with the exception of cases provided for in parts four and five of this article, as well as Article 35 of this Code.

If a crime was started in a place subject to the jurisdiction of one court, and ended in a place subject to the jurisdiction of another court, then the criminal case is subject to the jurisdiction of the court at the place where the crime was completed.

If the crimes were committed in different places, then the criminal case is considered by the court, whose jurisdiction extends to the place where the majority of the crimes investigated in this criminal case were committed or the most serious of them were committed.

If a crime was committed outside the Russian Federation and the preliminary investigation of the criminal case was carried out on the territory of the Russian Federation in accordance with Article 459 of this Code on the grounds provided for in Article 12 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the criminal case is considered by a court whose jurisdiction extends to the place of residence or place of stay of the victim in the Russian Federation or to the place of residence or place of stay of the accused in the Russian Federation, if the victim lives or stays outside the Russian Federation.

A criminal case of private prosecution or a statement by a victim about a crime committed by a citizen of the Russian Federation against a citizen of the Russian Federation outside the Russian Federation is subject to consideration by a magistrate whose jurisdiction extends to the territory in which the victim or accused resides.

The issue of changing the territorial jurisdiction of criminal cases specified in parts four and five of this article is resolved in the manner established by Article 35 of this Code.

Thus. in this case, the criminal case against these persons should be sent to the Kazan police department. The jurisdiction of such cases determines where most of the crimes were committed.

Sincerely, lawyer Anatoly Antonov, managing partner of the law firm Antonov and Partners.

Still have questions for your lawyer? Ask them right now here, or call us by phone in Moscow +7 (499) 288-34-32 or in Samara +7 (846) 212-99-71 (24 hours a day), or come to our office for a consultation (by pre-registration)!

Summary of court cases

To obtain general information about the number of cases brought against a potential counterparty that are under the jurisdiction of courts of general jurisdiction, you need to create a company card. Then, on the “ Summary Courts of General Jurisdiction block , which provides information on the number of cases in which the company of interest acts as a plaintiff, defendant, third party (involved at the request of one of the parties), as well as the number of cases for administrative offenses.

Block “Courts of General Jurisdiction”

Basic principles

If government agencies fail to comply with the rules of jurisdiction enshrined in the law, negative consequences may occur.

The legality of justice should be based on the following principles:

The court accepts only those cases that are within its jurisdiction.
A decision made by a court in violation of the rules of jurisdiction is declared invalid.
The parties to the proceedings may request that the case be referred to the competent authority.
The case in the court where it was received must be considered from beginning to end, with the exception of the case of filing claims.
When sending a case to court, it is necessary to take into account both the generic and territorial jurisdiction of criminal cases in criminal proceedings.
A judge who has received a case for proceedings and decides that it is not within the jurisdiction of the court to which it was received must be redirected to the competent authority.
Disagreements and disputes between judicial authorities regarding the determination of the jurisdiction of certain cases are not allowed.

More information can be obtained by asking questions in the comments to the article.

Detailed information on cases of courts of general jurisdiction

To obtain more detailed information, you need to click on the selected line in the block or go to the “ Courts of General Jurisdiction ” tab. On the tab, cases are grouped depending on the company's side in the case in question:

defendant
disputes under the Code of Administrative Offenses
plaintiff
third party

Court Case Analytics

Each case has a card that contains the following information:

date of receipt at the source
case number
category , the nature of the claim is indicated
plaintiff , full name of the company or full name of the citizen
defendant , full name of the company or FIL of the citizen
other participants , indicated if available
court , name of judicial body
judge , full name indicated
result , summary of the court decision

In relation to cases of administrative offenses, the card will additionally indicate the article of the Code of Administrative Offences.

The Kontur.Focus system allows the user to go to the personal card of the plaintiff or defendant; to do this, simply click on the organization of interest.

The system's capabilities provide the function of downloading information of interest in any of the available formats: .xlxs, .docs, .pdf . This function is aimed at facilitating the work with the received information, since it allows you to exchange it with partners, as well as use it for further analysis.

Unloading

Information about criminal cases, expensive civil or administrative claims brought against a potential counterparty may indicate the unreliability of the company and possible financial difficulties. For a comprehensive assessment of the company’s activities, we recommend using the following capabilities of the Kontur.Focus system: SME registers, concluded government contracts, pledges of movable property, mentions on the Internet.

Protective measures

The corresponding resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of Russia is published by Rossiyskaya Gazeta. Let us not hide the fact that sometimes it is in the first instance that the fate of a person is mainly decided.

Higher courts can reduce the punishment, change the qualifications, but extremely rarely completely cancel the sentence. If the first instance decides that the defendant is guilty, then further reconsideration will be very difficult.

It is all the more important that in the first instance the defense has equal opportunities with the prosecution and that the competition is real. Procedures guarantee that everything will be considered fairly.

Before the start of the trial, the defendant must be explained all his rights, including the right to participate in debates, the right to defense, and so on. At the same time, regarding the right of the defendant and the victim to testify at any time during the judicial investigation, it is noted that this right is exercised by them with the permission of the presiding officer.

The defendant and the victim can speak at the trial at any time - but only with the permission of the judge

During the judicial investigation, it is necessary to find out the circumstances that characterize the personality of the defendant and that are important for the verdict or other final court decision. Some points of the already adopted resolution cause certain concerns in the legal community. But practice will show everything. The dispute arose over the point regarding the questioning of a specialist when he was invited by the defense.

As Henry Reznik, vice-president of the Federal Chamber of Lawyers, said in a conversation with an RG correspondent, the prepared explanations actually approve of the violation of the principle of equality of parties in the process.

“The law directly says that if a specialist appears, the court has no right to refuse to question him,” said Henry Resnik. — The clarifications under consideration indicate that the interrogation of a specialist is carried out “if necessary” and if this specialist has previously participated in a preliminary investigation or court hearing. How can you assess the need if you haven’t yet had time to listen to the specialist himself?!”

Judge of the Supreme Court of Russia Alexander Zamashnyuk, who was the rapporteur on this resolution, in turn believes that the clarifications should not lead to a violation of the principle of adversarial proceedings and discrepancies should not arise in practice.

As he said, answering a direct question from a lawyer's newspaper, the defense, which presented a specialist's opinion and ensured the participation of such a specialist in the meeting, the court does not refuse the participation of such a specialist in the meeting. That is, it turns out that the person will be allowed to speak. But the court checks the specialist’s credentials, certifies his competence, checks how well his conclusion complies with the requirements of criminal procedural legislation, allows him to participate in the process and interrogates him on the circumstances for which the specialist was brought in.

“Therefore, there is no such kind of contradiction here: either the specialist who took part or the one who presented the conclusion,” says the judge of the Supreme Court of Russia.