Communicated on 27 January 2014
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 51255/07
Stanislav Aleksandrovich KRUPSKIY
against Russia
lodged on 22 October 2007
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Mr Stanislav Aleksandrovich Krupskiy, is a Russian national who was born in 1975 and is serving a prison sentence in the Republic of Mordoviya. He is represented before the Court by Mr V. Rakhmanov, a lawyer practising in Samara.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
On 3 June 2005 the applicant, a police officer with the Samara Regional Department of the Federal Drug Control Service at the time, was arrested on suspicion of drug dealing.
It appears that shortly after the arrest the applicant was released on his own recognisance. He retained lawyer R. to represent him in the criminal proceedings.
On 10 January 2006 the Oktyabrskiy District Court of Samara found the applicant guilty of abuse of power and drug dealing and sentenced him to eight and a half years’ imprisonment. Both the applicant’s lawyer and the prosecutor appealed.
On 7 April 2006 the Samara Regional Court upheld the applicant’s conviction on appeal.
On an unspecified date the applicant’s lawyer lodged a complaint seeking a supervisory review of the applicant’s conviction. According to the statement of complaint, both the trial and appeal courts had failed to correctly determine the circumstances of the case and had based their findings regarding the applicant’s guilt on inadmissible evidence.
On 10 May 2007 the Presidium of the Regional Court considered the supervisory-review complaint lodged by the applicant’s lawyer against the judgments of 10 January and 7 April 2006. The court reclassified in part the charges against the applicant and found him guilty of abuse of power and attempted drug dealing. The applicant was present and asked the court to adjourn the hearing in order to ensure his lawyer’s participation in it. The prosecutor attended the hearing and made submissions to the court. It appears that the applicant’s lawyer did not attend the hearing owing to the court’s failure to notify him of the date and time thereof.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complains under Article 6 § 3 (c) of the Convention that on 10 May 2007 the Presidium of the Samara Regional Court conducted a supervisory review of his case in his lawyer’s absence.
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES
As regards the absence of the applicant’s counsel from the supervisory-review hearing before the Presidium of the Samara Regional Court on 10 May 2007, were the criminal proceedings in the applicant’s case compliant with the standards set out Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy