The process of proving in criminal cases consists of many factors, one of which is the use in the process of proving evidence obtained during the investigation of a criminal case or consideration of a criminal case on the merits. As evidence, according to Article 74 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the testimony of the suspect, the accused, the testimony of the victim, the witness, the conclusion and testimony of an expert, the conclusion and testimony of a specialist, physical evidence, protocols of investigative and judicial actions and other documents can act. At the same time, none of the evidence has a predetermined force and is evaluated in aggregate along with other evidence. The subjects of proof – the investigator (inquirer), the prosecutor, the court, as well as the defense attorney must evaluate any evidence in terms of their admissibility, relevance and reliability, and all in aggregate – their sufficiency for the consideration of a criminal case. Evaluation of the expert's opinion causes the greatest difficulties in practice for all participants in the proof process, since they have to face evidence, the study of which requires certain skills and knowledge. Based on this circumstance, an attempt has been made to reveal in the article the criminalistic and criminal procedural aspects of such an assessment. Special emphasis is placed on the typical mistakes and shortcomings that experts make when preparing their conclusions, as well as mistakes made by participants in the proof process when studying the text of the expert opinion. Recommendations for correcting such errors are proposed, as well as a recommendation for changing the current criminal procedure legislation.

заключение эксперта, доказательство, субъекты доказывания, допустимость, экспертная деятельность, методика экспертного исследования, критерии оценки доказательств, процесс доказывания, выводы эксперта

Koisin Alexander Anatolyevich – Senior Lecturer of the Department of Judicial Law, Law Institute, Irkutsk State University (1, K. Marx st., Irkutsk, 664003, Russian Federation), ORCID 0000-0003-2573-488X, e-mail: koisin@mail.ru

Koisin A. A. Ocenka zaklyucheniya eksperta: kriminalisticheskie i ugolovno-processual'nye aspekty [Evaluation of the expert's opinion: Criminalistic and criminal procedural aspects] Sibirskij yuridicheskij vestnik [Siberian Law Herald]. 2022, no 4(99), pp. 98 - 106. DOI 10.26516/2071-8136.2022.4.98. (in Russian).

MPHADR

1. Zolotykh V.V. Proverka dopustimosti dokazatel’stv v ugolovnom protsesse. [Verification of the admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings]. Rostov na Donu, 1999. 288 p. (in Russian)

2. Koisin A.A. Ispol’zovanie spetsial’nykh znanii v sudoproizvodstve: ucheb. posobie [The use of special knowledge in legal proceedings: textbook. stipend]. Irkutsk, IGU Publ., 2013, 166 p. (in Russian)

3. Kriminalistika: uchebnik dlya bakalavrov pod red. L.Ya. Drapkina. [Criminalistics: a textbook for bachelors. Ed. by L.Ya. Drapkin]. Moscow, Yurait Publ., 2013. 831 p. (in Russian)

4. Kuznetsov A.A. Osnovnye napravleniya otsenki zaklyucheniya eksperta [The main directions of evaluation of the expert’s conclusion]. Vestnik Omskoi yuridicheskoi akademii [Bulletin of the Omsk Law Academy]. 2015, no. 1 (26), p. 63-65. (in Russian)

5. Kudryavtsev Yu.S. Ob otsenke ekspertnogo zaklyucheniya [On the evaluation of the expert opinion]. Sudebnaya vlast’ i ugolovnyi protsess [Judicial Power and Criminal Procedure]. 2018, no. 3, pp. 102-106. (in Russian)

6. Merinov E.A. Osnovaniya priznaniya zaklyucheniya eksperta po ugolovnomu delu nedopustimym dokazatel’stvom v stadii sudebnogo razbiratel’stva [Grounds for recognizing the conclusion of an expert in a criminal case as inadmissible evidence at the stage of trial]. Available at: https://wiselawyer.ru/poleznoe/15975-osnovaniya-priznaniya-zaklyucheniya-ehksperta-ugolovnomu-delu-nedopustimym (date of access: 18.07.2022). (in Russian)

7. Metodicheskie rekomendatsii po podgotovke materialov dlya provedeniya fonoskopicheskikh ekspertiz [Methodological recommendations for the preparation of materials for conducting phonoscopic examinations]. Ufa, 2008, 41 p. (in Russian)

8. Orlov Yu.K. Zaklyuchenie eksperta i ego otsenka (po ugolovnym delam). Ucheb. posobie [Expert opinion and its assessment (in criminal cases). Textbook] Moscow, Yurist Publ., 1995. 64 p. (in Russian)

9. Prorvich V.A. Sudebno-otsenochnaya ekspertiza. Pravovye, organizatsionnye i nauchno-metodicheskie osnovy: ucheb. posobie [Forensic evaluation examination. Legal, organizational, scientific and methodological foundations: textbook]. Moscow, Yuniti-Dana Publ., 2015, 399 p. (in Russian)

10. Poccinckaya E.P., Galyashina E.I. Nastol’naya kniga sud’i: sudebnaya ekspertiza [The judge’s handbook: Forensic examination]. Moscow, 2010, 458 p. (in Russian)

11. Khomutov S.V. O nekotorykh osobennostyakh otsenki zaklyucheniya eksperta sledovatelem i sudom [On some features of the evaluation of the expert’s conclusion by the investigator and the court]. Yurist-Pravoved [Jurist-Pravoved]. 2018, no. 4 (87), pp. 184-185. (in Russian)

12. Shurukhnov N.G. Kriminalistika: Kurs lektsii [Criminalistics: Course of lectures]. Moscow, Eksmo Publ., 2006, 624 p. (in Russian)