Classification of judicial investigation situations and its importance for criminalistic tactics

Abstract

The problems of defining the criteria for determining judicial investigation situations are studied. Situations occurring during the prejudicial inquiry and legal proceedings have same epistemological nature, which allows to successfully apply the existing classification base to systematize and order the situations of judicial investigation. The author distinguishes the judicial problem-searching situations, occurring in the courts of original jurisdiction, of appellate jurisdiction, of review and of reviewing authority, differing in the character of problem raised and solved by the court. The typical situation in the courts of original jurisdiction is collecting evidence sufficient for making judicial decision. The typical situation in the courts of appellate jurisdiction, of review and of reviewing authority is validating decisions made by the court of original jurisdiction. The difference in the line of development of typical judicial investigation situations and search and cognitive activity’s character is shown. The author distinguishes typical problem-searching judicial situations, occurring in the court of original jurisdiction, connected with: 1) saving the evidence seized during prejudicial inquiry; 2) filling the gaps in prejudicial inquiry materials; 3) providing judicial assessment of evidence; 4) making judicial decision. The court of original jurisdiction adjudicates in a case, courts of appellate jurisdiction, of review and of reviewing authority review the judicial decision (their revision activity is provided with search and cognitive means to a lesser extent). The most widespread problem-searching judicial situations in the court of appellate jurisdiction are distinguished. The information uncertainty in mentioned situations cannot be overcome by cognitive means of such courts