Supreme Court: Inaccuracy in the Appeal Claim is Not a Ground for Refusal to Open Proceedings
An inaccuracy in the wording of the appeal claim, taking into account the competence of the appellate court (part 2 of article 404 of the Criminal Procedure Code), does not prevent the court from deciding on the opening of appellate proceedings. This conclusion was made by the panel of judges of the First Judicial Panel of the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court in case No. 285/3433/24.
Positions of the courts of first and appellate instances
The local court found the accused guilty and sentenced her under part 1 of article 367 of the Criminal Code. The defense attorney, on behalf of the accused, filed an appeal against this verdict, which the reporting judge of the appellate court left without action and granted a deadline to eliminate the identified deficiencies, indicating that the appeal did not contain specific claims or any justification of the illegality or unreasonableness of the contested decision. Within the established deadline, the defense attorney submitted a statement to the appellate court to eliminate the deficiencies, stating that the appeal he submitted contained a specific reference to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, claims, justification, and the position of the defense side. The reporting judge, based on paragraph 1 of part 3 of article 399 of the Criminal Procedure Code, returned the appeal to the defense attorney due to failure to eliminate the identified deficiencies. The defense attorney disagreed with this decision of the judge and filed a cassation appeal.
Position of the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court
The ruling of the appellate court judge was canceled and a new hearing was scheduled in the appellate court.
The panel of judges of the Criminal Cassation Court indicated that when determining whether the person filing the appeal has met the requirements of article 396 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the appellate court must take into account the requirements of articles 22 and 26 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which provide that the parties to criminal proceedings are free to exercise their rights, and the court decides only on the issues brought before it by the parties. The fact that the party did not specify certain arguments in its appeal or presented them in such a way that the appellate court, from the text of the contested decision and the submitted appeal, considers them unfounded, according to the Criminal Procedure Code, cannot be considered a deficiency of the appeal within the meaning of the norms provided by articles 396 and 399 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Which issues the party brings before the court and what decision it demands are within its discretionary powers, and the use of these powers at the discretion of the person filing the appeal cannot be regarded as such a deficiency of the appeal that would be grounds for its return. All arguments of the appeal must be resolved as a result of the appellate review; the claims of the appeal in terms of persuasiveness and/or justification cannot be analyzed at the stage of opening proceedings.
The panel of judges of the Criminal Cassation Court noted that the inaccuracy in the wording of the appeal claim, considering the competence of the appellate court (part 2 of article 404 of the Criminal Procedure Code), did not prevent the court from deciding on the opening of appellate proceedings.
The ruling of the panel of judges of the First Judicial Panel of the Criminal Cassation Court of the Supreme Court dated 09.06.2026 in case No. 285/3433/24 (proceeding No. 51-2976km25) can be viewed at this link.
Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua and to Google News SUD.UA, as well as to our VIBER and WhatsApp, and follow us on Facebook and Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.
