Skip to content
Yalanzhi & PartnersCriminal defence in Russia

Case results

Sentence cut from 11 years to 5 years 6 months — Article 228.1, cassation

Article 228.1 part 4 of the Criminal CodeCassation · Supreme Court of the Russian FederationSentence halved

Before

11 years of imprisonment

After

5 years 6 months

How

Errors in the classification of the offence. Cassation complaint built on the legal positions of the Supreme Court.

The situation

A conviction under part 4 of Article 228.1 — the most serious tier of the drug trafficking article — with a sentence of eleven years. The courts below had treated the conduct as falling within a heavier classification than the evidence supported.

The result

The cassation instance accepted that the offence had been classified wrongly and reduced the sentence to five years and six months.

In detail

Analysis

What this stage is

Cassation is not a rehearing. By this point the verdict has entered into legal force and the evidence is fixed; the court is looking only for breaches of law significant enough to have affected the outcome. Arguments that the wrong witness was believed do not survive here. Arguments that the act was placed under the wrong article do.

Why classification carried the case

Article 228.1 is divided into parts, and the parts are separated by years. Part 4 carries ten to twenty years; the parts below it start far lower. Where a court has attached a part of the article that the established facts do not support, the sentence is unlawful even if every finding of fact is left untouched — which is precisely the kind of error cassation exists to correct.

Why the Supreme Court's own positions mattered

Cassation complaints that work are written in the court's own language: its Plenum resolutions and its published reviews of judicial practice. A complaint arguing that a sentence is unfair in the abstract is refused. A complaint showing that the classification departs from how the Supreme Court has said the article must be read is a different document, and this was one.

Published in summary form with identifying details removed. A result obtained in one case is not a prediction for another: outcomes depend on the evidence, the classification and the procedural history of the specific case.

See also

Other case results