About improving regulation of the procedural order and the limits of changing the charges by the court
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relevance. The article is devoted to the analysis of the problems of law enforcement in the field of changing the charge by the court of first instance. The article examines a number of issues: the possibility of changing the charge if a criminal case is terminated on non-rehabilitating grounds; granting the court a power to initiate a change in the charge; establishing the obligation of the public prosecutor to change the charge; changing the charge by the court if crime is reclassifying as a private prosecution crime; the limits of changing the charge by the court; changing the charge if a crime is committed in complicity; eliminating a technical error in the charge by the court. The proposals by the criminal procedure scientists are studied. Assessment of the possibility of implementing the provisions provided for by the legislation of a number of foreign countries (Lithuania, Norway, Canada, Brazil) governing the procedure and limits for changing the charge by the court. The purpose of the study is to analyze the problems that arise when the first instance court change the charges and formulate solutions. Research objectives: study of possible ways to improve the regulation of changing charges by the court; analysis of the legislation of foreign countries (Lithuania, Norway, Canada, Brazil, Malta, Azerbaijan) and the judicial practice of the ECHR in this area; developing solutions to problematic issues of changing charges by the court. Methodology. The methodological basis of the study was formed by comparative legal and historical methods of legal science, as well as analysis and synthesis. The results of the study consist in the development of theoretical proposals and practical recommendations for improving the procedural order and the limits of changing charges by the court in domestic legal proceedings. Conclusions. As a result of the study, the following main conclusions were formulated: it is necessary to establish a power of the court to change the charge if a criminal case are terminated, grounding by articles 75, 76, 76.2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; granting to the court a right to raise the issue of changing the charge are violating the principles of impartiality of the court and the adversarial nature of the criminal process; the limits of the change of charge by the court need to be clarified.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.051 | 0.087 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.048 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".