Investigative actions as methods of collection and formation of evidence

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

The paper considers concepts of investigative action competing in the theory of criminal procedure – the concept of investigative action as a method of collecting evidence and the concept of investigative action as a method of forming evidence. By studying the mechanism of interaction of the preliminary investigation body with traces of a crime, the author substantiates the nonidentity of the concepts of “collection of evidence” and “formation of evidence” in order to determine the place of each of them in the system of criminal proceedings. The study shows that the discussion about the nature of investigative action is generated by a complex, multi-component and ambiguous concept of evidence, which has informational (cognitive) content and an external form that preserves this content, both independent of the actions of the investigator, inquiry officer and created (formed) by him during investigative actions. According to the author, the two scientific concepts of the epistemological nature of investigative action considered in the paper are based on the difference between ready (paratus, according to S.B. Rossinsky) evidence and evidence that receives a procedural form in the process of investigative action. Taking into account the nonidentity of the concepts of “collection of evidence” and “formation of evidence” noted in the paper, the author rejects the proposal made in science to replace the first term with the second. Each of them has its own content, and none of them is a universal characteristic of an investigative action, the structure of each of which contains both rules regulating the process of collecting evidence and rules concerning the formation of evidence. Formulating a proposal to classify evidence into collected (received) and formed, based on the degree of influence of the cognitive activity of the investigator, inquiry officer on their content, the author substantiates the conclusion about the impossibility of classifying investigative actions themselves into methods of collecting evidence and methods of their formation.

About the authors

Valentina A. Lazareva

Academician S.P. Korolev Samara National Research University

Author for correspondence.
Email: lazareva.va@ssau.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2725-9517

Doctor of Sciences (Law), Professor

Russian Federation, 443086, Samara, Moskovskoye Shosse, 34

References

  1. Sheyfer S.A. Sobiranie dokazatelstv v sovetskom ugolovnom protsesse [Collection of evidence in Soviet criminal procedure]. Saratov, Saratovskiy universitet Publ., 1986. 170 p.
  2. Sheyfer S.A. Sledstvennye deystviya: sistema i protsessualnaya forma [Investigative actions. System and procedural form]. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2001. 208 p. EDN: NGGUDB.
  3. Rossinskiy S.B. Sledstvennye deystviya [Investigative actions]. Moscow, Norma Publ., 2018. 240 p.
  4. Ryzhakov A.P. Sledstvennye deystviya i inye sposoby sobiraniya dokazatelstv [Investigative actions and other methods of collecting evidence]. Moscow, Filin Publ., 1997. 334 p.
  5. Sementsov V.A. Polygraph examination. Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, 2011, no. 2, pp. 111–116. EDN: NLQQRB.
  6. Sementsov V.A. New investigative action - verification of polygraph readings. Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, 2010, no. 5, pp. 132–137. EDN: MUQDHB.
  7. Komissarova Ya.V. Substantiation of a technique using polygraph examinations. Ugolovnyy protsess, 2013, no. 7, pp. 74–83. EDN: QJEWPD.
  8. Solovev A.B. Dokazyvanie po Ugolovno-protsessualnomu kodeksu Rossiyskoy Federatsii (dosudebnye stadii) [Proof by the Rules of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation (pre-trial stages)]. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2003. 264 p.
  9. Maslennikova L.N., ed. Dokazyvanie i prinyatie resheniy v sostyazatelnom ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [Proof and decision making in adversary criminal proceedings]. 2nd ed., pererab. i dop. Moscow, Norma Publ., 2021. 448 p.
  10. Zhogin N.V., ed. Teoriya dokazatelstv v sovetskom ugolovnom protsesse [Theory of evidence in Soviet criminal procedure]. 2nd ed. ispr. i dop. Moscow, Yuridicheskaya literatura Publ., 1973. 736 p.
  11. Belkin R.S. Prospects for the development of Soviet criminalistics. Trudy Vysshey shkoly MOOP SSSR. Moscow, NIiRIO VSh MOOP SSSR Publ., 1967. Vyp. 15, pp. 3–11.
  12. Mikheenko M.M. Dokazyvanie v sovetskom ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve [Proof in Soviet criminal proceedings]. Kiev, Vishcha shkola Publ., 1984. 133 p.
  13. Zaytsev O.A. Theoretical views of professor S.A. Sheifer on conceptual problems in the theory of proof. Vestnik Samarskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2014, no. 11-1, pp. 29–35. EDN: SYMABT.
  14. Dolya E.A. The origin of evidence in criminal proceedings. Zakonnost, 2016, no. 10, pp. 65–70. EDN: XAAGDH.
  15. Abdullaev Ya.D., Miller V.Yu. Two approaches of evidence formation in criminal procedure. Yuridicheskaya nauka i praktika: Vestnik Nizhegorodskoy akademii MVD Rossii, 2021, no. 1, pp. 75–79. doi: 10.36511/2078-5356-2021-1-75-79.
  16. Sementsov V.A. Sledstvennye deystviya v dosudebnom proizvodstve: obshchie polozheniya teorii i praktiki [Investigative actions in pre-trial proceedings: general provisions of theory and practice]. Ekaterinburg, Uralskaya gosudarstvennaya yuridicheskaya akademiya Publ., 2006. 300 p.
  17. Osodoeva N.V. On the issue of the possibility classifying certain procedural actions as investigative in criminal proceeding. Akademicheskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, 2022, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 87–94. doi: 10.17150/1819-0928.2022.23(1).87-94.
  18. Baranov A.M. Investigative actions or methods of collecting evidence. Zakony Rossii: opyt, analiz, praktika, 2023, no. 7, pp. 17–21. EDN: VOYAJK.
  19. Davydovskaya M.V. Investigative actions and other ways of collecting evidence: are there significant differences? Vestnik Dalnevostochnogo yuridicheskogo instituta MVD Rossii, 2022, no. 4, pp. 19–24. EDN: KGXWEG.
  20. Sementsov V.A. Formation of evidence in the structure of criminal procedural evidence. Aktualnye problemy sovremennogo ugolovnogo protsessa Rossii: mezhvuzovskiy sbornik nauchnykh trudov. Samara, Samarskiy universitet Publ., 2010. Vyp. 5, pp. 236–242. EDN: YLYUCX.
  21. Rossinskiy S.B. Rezultaty “neverbalnykh” sledstvennykh i sudebnykh deystviy kak vid dokazatelstv po ugolovnomu delu [Results of “non-verbal” investigative and judicial actions as a type of evidence in a criminal case]. Moscow, Yurlitinform Publ., 2015. 224 p.
  22. Rossinskiy S.B. Means of proving in criminal proceedings. Yuridicheskiy vestnik Samarskogo universiteta, 2023, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 37–45. doi: 10.18287/2542-047X-2023-9-1-37-45.
  23. Rossinskiy S.B. Collection of evidence vs examination of evidence in the context of the Shafer theory of investigative actions (on the 100th anniversary of the Teacher’s birthday). Yuridicheskiy vestnik Samarskogo universiteta, 2024, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 47–54. doi: 10.18287/2542-047X-2024-10-3-47-54.
  24. Sheyfer S.A. Investigative action - the legitimacy of new interpretation? Lex Russica (Russkiy zakon), 2015, vol. 107, no. 10, pp. 115–127. EDN: VASXVV.
  25. Tikhonov S.E. Issues of the admissibility of evidence obtained as a result of operational investigative measures aimed at replacing investigative actions. Kriminalist, 2024, no. 1, pp. 89–94. EDN: HSJMWA.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2025 Lazareva V.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies