They are, unfortunately, an endless problem for modern motorists, but at the same time, in some situations, everything can be quite simply solved by negotiating or calling the traffic police, while in other situations this cannot be done, because another driver left the place car accident. Next, we will talk about what constitutes this violation in accordance with applicable law and what punishment is currently due for it.
What is an accident?
Before understanding what constitutes leaving the scene of an accident, it is worth considering what, in principle, a traffic accident is. An accident is a situation when, during the movement of vehicles with the participation of one or more cars, people were injured or died, as well as damage to certain property.
If you are traveling by car, as a result of which you ran into a pedestrian, then this situation falls under the category of traffic accidents, but if the pedestrian himself fell into a standing car, then in this case it is no longer such. Again, if a pedestrian is hit by a bottle that was thrown from a vehicle window, this is also not an accident, while damage caused by a bicycle falling out of the body is one of them.
What should the driver do?
As you know, leaving the scene of an accident is a fairly serious violation of the law, since in accordance with the rules of the road there is a certain list of actions that a driver must do if he finds himself in a similar situation. Initially, the person involved in this situation must immediately stop the movement of his vehicle, activate the alarm system and put up a special warning triangle, as evidenced by the requirements of the current legislation.
emergency cases
At the same time, it is worth noting the fact that if, as a result of the situation, there are dead or injured people, the driver must act somewhat differently. First of all, it will be necessary to take measures in order to provide first aid to the victims and at the same time to call the police and an ambulance without fail. In the presence of any emergency situations, the victims should be sent by passing, and if it is impossible to do this, they should be delivered by their own vehicle to the medical organization that is closest to the scene of the incident. At the same time, it is worth noting the fact that the driver must provide the registration plate of his vehicle, and then independently return to the scene. In this case, leaving the scene of an accident is not taken into account (the victims need urgent help).
What should be done at the scene of an accident?
Among other things, it is necessary to completely empty the carriageway in the event that the normal movement of other vehicles is impossible. At the same time, a video recording or photography of the initial position of vehicles in relation to each other, as well as to various road infrastructure facilities, must be carried out without fail. Also, various traces and objects that are directly related to this incident should be recorded.
The addresses and names of eyewitnesses are also recorded in detail, after which the arrival of the police is expected.
What do professional lawyers recommend in case of an accident?
First of all, leaving the scene of an accident is highly discouraged, since later this will only lead to additional proceedings. It is best to stop the transport initially, but it is worth considering the fact that the traffic police will necessarily measure the distance between cars. That is why, if for one reason or another, for example, you were thrown into another lane, if possible, it is best to return the car to your own lane and only then turn off the engine. Due to this, you can exclude any unnecessary claims from road inspectors.
The alarm must be turned on without fail. The only exception in this case is damage to the electrical wiring or various damage to the headlights due to this incident.
The traffic police are called. The best option would be to simply leave everything as it is, and then wait for the arrival of the inspectors, because it is in your interests to reliably determine the culprit of the accident, who will subsequently be fully involved in the full payment for the repair work of each of the vehicles.
Presence of casualties
In the presence of victims, an ambulance is initially called and only then first aid is provided independently. If you do not know how to properly help a person in a certain situation, you should interview eyewitnesses, because most likely someone will be able to help you apply a bandage or stop the victim from bleeding. In the presence of serious injuries, injured or even dead, it is especially not recommended to leave the scene of an accident. The punishment in this case is much more severe.
Always record the scene
Among other things, independently fix the initial location of the cars, all kinds of dents, fragments, as well as fix the braking distance and all other elements that are somehow related to this incident. After that, it will be possible to remove your car from the roadway, but this can only be done when it interferes with the movement of other cars and is the cause of the resulting traffic jam. If it is possible to properly organize a detour, then you need to do this, because due to this you will be able to keep as many things as possible in their original places - this is better for you.
Separately, it should be said that the fulfillment of such requirements is prescribed in the current legislation, if you do not carry out all these procedures, you will be fined accordingly.
What happens if you leave the scene of an accident?
Any person who has an accident, regardless of whether it is a passenger or a driver, is always under the influence of stress, as a result of which he may not keep himself under control and simply disappear from the scene, fearing responsibility. At the same time, in accordance with the current legislation (Article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, part 2), it is supposed to deprive the right to drive vehicles for 1-1.5 years or impose an administrative arrest for up to 15 days if a person left the scene of an accident. How to avoid liability in this case? It is best to consult with professional lawyers and enlist their support, however, if you know all the features and subtleties of such situations, you can handle them completely on your own.
Drinking alcoholic beverages, etc.
If the accident is serious enough, then drivers will start drinking after the accident, sad about their former car if it is no longer repairable. In accordance with the current legislation, the driver is strictly forbidden to use all kinds of psychotropic substances and alcoholic beverages after a traffic accident. Alcohol is prohibited exactly until the moment when the state of intoxication of this driver is established or a decision is made that he can be exempted from such an examination.
statute of limitations
Of course, there is a statute of limitations for such a crime as leaving the scene of an accident. How to avoid liability in this case? Wait until this time, if possible.
In principle, any professional lawyer will tell you that the most unwise decision in the event of a traffic accident is to leave the scene of an accident. The article for this violation is not yet so significant, but do not forget that in this case it will be much easier later to prove that you are the culprit of what happened.
What can happen?
Traffic police officers begin an investigation, as a result of which witnesses are established who could see you and your car. If the second motorist managed to install a video recorder in his vehicle, then later you can be found quite quickly through the registration plates. Most likely, sellers of local shops or some random passers-by turned their attention to this incident, as a result of which they will also confirm the fact that you fled after this incident. Thus, in the end, you may be overtaken by deprivation of rights for leaving the scene of an accident.
Among other things, it is worth noting the fact that you need to stay at the scene of the accident only for the reason that later it will be extremely difficult to prove in court that you are not guilty. If we talk about the statute of limitations for this crime, then in accordance with the current legislation, after leaving the scene of an accident without victims, a decision on an administrative violation can be issued within three months, while in the future it will no longer be possible to make it. .
But in fact, mostly experts say that during this time the responsibility for leaving the scene of an accident can be much more serious, and even if you still manage to avoid it, otherwise a lot can change far from your side. It is for this reason that it is much better to simply remain at the scene of the accident and at the same time provide active assistance to the investigation, since in the future this will be taken into account if you are guilty.
Unintentional abandonment
Often, with the onset of winter, a fairly large number of accidents occur in large cities, and utilities in the vast majority of cases are simply not ready for such situations, which ultimately leads to a large number of traffic jams, and road traffic capacity is significantly reduced. In accordance with the current legislation, there are no deadlines during which you need to wait for the traffic police, as a result of which drivers can simply lose patience and unintentionally leave the scene of an accident.
The court has the formal right to turn such drivers into ordinary pedestrians for up to a year and a half, but in fact, if you look at this situation, if the car moves from the accident site by about 500-1000 meters, then this cannot be called leaving the road traffic accident - this falls under the non-compliance with traffic rules, and in this case there is no fine for leaving the scene of an accident.
When can you leave the scene of an accident?
However, it is worth noting the fact that each driver has his own rights, which many often forget about or simply do not know about. Thus, when an accident occurs, you must immediately call 02 and report the place where the accident occurred, as well as the time of this incident. After this call has been recorded, you can stay where you are and wait for the traffic police to arrive.
However, in fact, none of the clauses of the current traffic rules oblige you personally to wait until the inspector arrives, that is, in this case, the most important thing is to leave the car in its place. The only thing worth noting is that the driver needs to stay at the scene of the accident for three hours, otherwise it will be considered that the driver fled the scene of the accident.
In other words, after an accident, you must notify the traffic police that such a situation has occurred, after which the cars must be in one place for three hours. At the same time, you yourself can be within sight nearby, and as soon as this time passes, you can make a second call to the service and report that law enforcement agencies have not arrived at this place, after which you can safely leave the scene of an accident - punishment you are no longer in danger.
Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses:
Article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. Failure to perform duties due to a traffic accident
1. Failure by a driver to fulfill the obligations provided for by the Rules of the Road in connection with a traffic accident in which he is a participant, except for the cases provided for by Part 2 of this Article, -
shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine in the amount of one thousand roubles.
2. Leaving by a driver, in violation of the Rules of the Road, the scene of a traffic accident, in which he was a participant, in the absence of signs of a criminally punishable act -
Clarifications of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation
The objective side of the offense, under Part. 1 Article. 12.27 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation
The actions of the driver of the vehicle, which form the objective side of the administrative offense provided for by Part 1 of Article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, include failure to fulfill the obligations provided for in paragraphs 2.5, 2.6 and 2.6. items related to the incident, take measures to provide first aid to the injured, call an ambulance and the police).
The objective side of the offense under Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (leaving the scene of an accident)
Explanations contained in invalid paragraph 11 Decrees of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 24, 2006 No. No. 18
Clause 11 of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated October 24, 2006 N 18 "On some issues that arise with the courts when applying the Special Part of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses" contained the following explanations:
Part 1 of Article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation establishes responsibility for the driver's failure to fulfill the obligations provided for in clauses 2.5, 2.6, 2.6.1 of the SDA, in connection with a traffic accident in which he is a participant, except for the cases provided for in part 2 of the named article.
The actions of the driver, which form the objective side of the composition of the administrative offense, provided for by Part 1 of Article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, in particular include:
failure to comply with the obligation provided for in clause 2.5 of the SDA to immediately stop, do not move the vehicle; turn on the emergency light alarm and set the emergency stop sign; do not move items related to the incident; take measures to provide first aid to the victims and send them to a medical institution; if it is necessary to clear the roadway, record in the presence of witnesses the position of vehicles, traces and objects related to the traffic accident, take measures to preserve them; report the incident to the police, write down the names and addresses of eyewitnesses, etc.;
non-compliance with the rules established by paragraphs 2.6 and 2.6.1 of the SDA, allowing you to leave the scene of a traffic accident, if there are no victims and disagreements between its participants in assessing the circumstances of the incident, but obliging you to file a traffic accident either at the nearest road patrol post (paragraph 2.6 ), or, in accordance with the Rules of Compulsory Insurance of Civil Liability of Vehicle Owners, without the participation of police officers (clause 2.6.1).
What actions of the driver are an offense under Part 1 of Art. 12.27 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation?
The actions of a driver who, in violation of the requirements of clause 2.5 of the SDA, left the place of a traffic accident in which he was a participant, form the objective side of the administrative offense provided for by part 2 of article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.
Liability under Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation occurs when an accident occurs both on the road and in the adjacent territory
When bringing to administrative responsibility, provided for in parts 1 and 2 of Article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, it should be borne in mind that the above actions of the driver form the objective side of the composition of these administrative offenses in cases where a traffic accident occurred both on the road and within adjacent territory.
18.04.2018Leaving the scene of an accident. Cancellation of the decision under Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation and termination of proceedings due to insignificance
Does leaving the scene of an accident always entail punishment under Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation or is a different outcome of the case possible? In this article, using the example of a specific case from my practice as a lawyer, we will talk about the possibility of terminating proceedings in a case of an administrative offense upon leaving the scene of an accident due to insignificance. The peculiarity of this case is that the category of insignificance was applied in the court of appeal, when the decision of the court of first instance on the deprivation of the right to drive a vehicle had already been issued.
Case plot:
A principal turned to me for legal assistance, who explained that a protocol on an administrative offense was drawn up against him on the fact of leaving the scene of an accident (part 2 of article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation), and a decision of the court of first instance had already been issued, according to which he was deprived of the right driving for one year.
The principal admitted the actual guilt in leaving the scene of an accident. To challenge the subjective side of the offense, as they say, in such situations “did not notice the collision”, I considered it unpromising, taking into account the position of the courts on this issue, as well as the actual circumstances of the case.
After reviewing the decision of the court of first instance, the case materials and finding out a number of significant points from the principal, I had an idea - why not try to cancel the decision of the court of first instance and terminate the proceedings due to the insignificance of the administrative offense (Article 2.9. Administrative Code of the Russian Federation ), especially since there have already been similar cases in my practice.
It was decided to build the position of the defense precisely along the path of proving the insignificance of the offense committed.
It is better to prove insignificance in the court of first instance, until a decision has been made, and the person brought to administrative responsibility has not been sentenced. In the situation under consideration, this opportunity had already been missed, so it was necessary to provide as much evidence as possible indicating the possibility of applying the provisions on the insignificance of the offense committed (Article 2.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).
Legal framework:
In accordance with Article 2.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, if the committed administrative offense is insignificant, the judge, body, official authorized to decide the case of an administrative offense may release the person who committed the administrative offense from administrative responsibility and confine himself to an oral remark.
According to paragraph 21 of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated March 24, 2005 N 5 “On some issues that arise with the courts when applying the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses”, if the insignificance of the committed administrative offense is established during the consideration of the case, the judge, on the basis of Article 2.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation has the right to release the guilty person from administrative responsibility and confine himself to an oral remark, which should be indicated in the decision to terminate the proceedings.
A minor administrative offense is an action or inaction, although formally containing signs of an administrative offense, but taking into account the nature of the offense committed and the role of the offender, the amount of harm and the severity of the consequences that have occurred, it does not represent a significant violation of protected public legal relations.
Based on the legal position set forth in the Ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated December 07, 2010 N 1702-О-О “On the refusal to accept for consideration the complaint of citizen Oleg Alexandrovich Krivodanov on violation of his constitutional rights by part 2 of article 12.27 of the Code of the Russian Federation on administrative offenses and the provision of clause 2.5 of the Rules of the Road of the Russian Federation”, an administrative offense provided for by part 2 of article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, in the absence of harmful consequences of leaving the scene of a traffic accident that did not cause harm to health and major damage and did not constitute a significant violation of protected public relations - may be, in accordance with Article 2.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, recognized by the law enforcement agency as insignificant and not entail administrative punishment.
Defense tactics:
In the case under consideration, taking into account the established circumstances, the nature of the offense committed, the role of the offender, the absence of grave consequences, in my opinion, there were all grounds for recognizing the offense as insignificant.
Thus, the nature of the collision of vehicles indicated that the collision was insignificant, and therefore it is difficult to notice such a collision.
As a result of the accident, only property was damaged, no other harm was caused (harm to health, legally protected interests). The damage was not significant in nature.
I advised the principal to meet with the victim and offer to voluntarily compensate for the damage caused, since in any case, even if the damage was compensated under OSAGO, the insurance company, under the circumstances described, after paying the compensation to the victim, would present recourse claims to the person who left the scene of the accident. The principal accepted this advice and compensated the damage in full, after which the victim wrote a receipt for compensation to him, and also wrote a petition in which he asked to consider the issue of recognizing the offense as insignificant. The specified petition and receipt were attached to the complaint. Previously, the principal was not brought to administrative responsibility, he had no unpaid fines. The experience of driving a car was 49 years, during which there was only 1 accident that occurred 12 years ago.
No aggravating circumstances were found in the case.
The principal was officially employed, worked as the director of a commercial organization, used the car for work purposes, since he needed to exercise control over the construction of facilities, including socially significant ones, as part of the implementation of the state program, in support of which the relevant documents were attached to the case file .
At the place of work and at the place of residence, the principal was characterized exclusively from the positive side, he was a military pensioner, he was repeatedly awarded for the period of military service.
Separately, it was noted that his daughter and three granddaughters, who are dependent on the latter, live together with the principal. In particular, the principal pays for tuition at the university for the eldest granddaughter. In addition, his daughter lives with the principal, who has the status of a large family and also needs financial support from him.
In connection with the above, the deprivation of the principal of the right to drive a vehicle may adversely affect his financial condition and, as a result, the well-being of his family.
These circumstances taken together testified that the offense committed by the principal did not entail any significant harmful consequences, the damage caused was compensated in full. The principal is a respectable citizen, officially employed, positively characterized, engaged in socially useful activities. The fact of collision of vehicles in fact was not disputed by the principal, the latter only indicated that he could not notice this collision. In connection with the foregoing, the offense committed can be recognized by the court as insignificant, and the person brought to administrative responsibility is released from administrative responsibility under Part 2 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, with the announcement of an oral remark.
Each of the circumstances listed above was confirmed by relevant evidence in order to justify to the court the presence of signs of insignificance of an administrative offense and, accordingly, the possibility of terminating the proceedings with an oral remark.
Summary of the case:
Taking into account the totality of the evidence presented, the court of appeal concluded that it was possible to cancel the decision of the court of first instance and terminate the proceedings in connection with the insignificance of the administrative offense. The principal was released from the previously imposed punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to drive a vehicle.
With the ruling of the court in the present case.
Case No. 5 - ***/2015
RESOLUTION
in the case of an administrative offense
Magistrate of the court district of the Petropavlovsk district of the Altai Territory O.V., with the participation of the defender Bosonogov A.E., having considered in open court the case of an administrative offense against Khlystov Anton Vasilievich, born on 01.01.1986, a native of the village of Sannikovo, Pervomaisky district of Altai Territory, a citizen of Russia, living st. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, established:
According to the protocol on an administrative offense Khlystov A.The. December 27, 2014 at 02:10 drove a vehicle - a Nissan Bluebird car, registration number C 452 TV 22 along the Aleysk-Petropavlovsk-Smolenskoye highway 140 km + 100 m of the Petropavlovsk district of the Altai Territory, did not choose a safe speed, lost control of the vehicle, allowed the exit to a ditch, in violation of paragraph 1 of Art. 2.7 of the Traffic Rules of the Russian Federation consumed alcohol after a traffic accident.
When considering the case Khlystov A.The. pleaded not guilty, gave explanations, from which it follows that on the night of 12/27/2014 he was driving a car, t.to. there was a snowstorm and ice, then stuck in the snow on the side of the road. After some time, a traffic police inspector drove up to him, took the keys to the car and left. The next day at the traffic police, after drawing up the documents, the inspector returned the keys to the car. He did not drink alcohol, he did not pass any examination. There was no damage to the car and there were no casualties.
At the hearing Khlystov A.The. did not appear, asked for consideration of the case in his absence.
By virtue of the provisions of Part 2 of Article 25.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the court considers it possible to consider the case in the absence of Khlystov A.V.
After listening to the defender Bosonogov A.E., examining the written materials of the case, the court comes to the following.
In accordance with paragraph 2.7 of the Traffic Rules of the Russian Federation, the driver is prohibited from consuming alcoholic beverages, narcotic, psychotropic or other intoxicating substances after a traffic accident in which he is involved, or after the vehicle was stopped at the request of a police officer, before the examination in order to establish the state of intoxication or until a decision is made on exemption from such an examination.
The provisions of part 3 of article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation establish administrative liability for failure to comply with the Rules of the Road on the prohibition of the driver to consume alcoholic beverages, narcotic or psychotropic substances after a traffic accident in which he is involved.
Circumstances of the offense specified in the administrative offense protocol disputed by Khlystov and his counsel, since this incident cannot be attributed to a traffic accident, t.to. there are no necessary criteria for a traffic accident defined by law. In addition, the fact of the use of alcoholic beverages is not confirmed by the case materials.
The arguments of Khlystov A.V., his defense lawyer, were confirmed during the trial, therefore, they are taken into account by the court.
Thus, a traffic accident is an event that occurred during the movement of a vehicle on the road and with its participation, in which people were killed or injured, vehicles, structures, cargo were damaged, or other material damage was caused (Article 2 of the Federal Law of 10.12.1995 (as amended on 10/14/2014) No. 196-FZ "On Road Safety", clause 1.2 of the Rules of the Road, approved by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 10/23/1993 (as amended on 12/19/2014) No. 1090).
The materials of this case do not confirm the fact of damage to the vehicle, causing other damage in the above incident.
According to the traffic accident certificate, it follows that the front bumper was damaged as a result of the accident. Khlystov A.V., as well as witnesses Legin V.A., Danilova O.V., who were in the car at the time of the incident, deny this fact.
From the testimony of witness Torokhov Yu.I., who helped Khlystov A.The. start the car and pull it out of the snow, it was found that there was no damage to the car.
The inspection report of the Nissan Bluebird vehicle registration plate C 452 TV 22 was not drawn up by the traffic police officer.
In addition, the evidence examined at the court session testifies that the Nissan Bluebird, driven by Khlystov A.V., got stuck in a snow bank formed on the side of the road.
Thus, it is impossible to make an unambiguous conclusion that the committed on December 27, 2014 at 02:10 am. “Descent into the ditch” of the Nissan Bluebird vehicle, registration plate C 452 TV 22, driven by Khlystov A.V. refers to a traffic accident.
The fact of drinking Khlystov A.The. on that day also did not find its confirmation in the proceedings.
Khlystov A.V. the use of alcoholic beverages 12/27/2014 denies.
Witnesses Burkovsky A.A., Pautov Yu.V. car keys, left. Pass inspection Inspector Khlystova A.V. did not offer. According to external signs Khlystov A.V. was sober.
When considering the case Khlystov A.V., his counsel petitioned for the recognition of the act of examination for the state of intoxication as inadmissible evidence, since during the examination the Rules for the examination of a person who drives a vehicle were violated. Thus, witnesses were not present during the examination, and their signatures are missing on the printed transcript of the examination result. In addition, an examination for the state of alcoholic intoxication was carried out after drawing up a protocol for an administrative offense.
The statement of Khlystov A.V., his defense counsel on the inadmissibility of using the certificate of examination for the state of intoxication 22 AT No. 113162 dated December 27, 2014 as evidence in the case, is subject to satisfaction.
Within the meaning of Article 29.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, a protocol on an administrative offense is a procedural document that describes the event of an offense indicating legally significant circumstances, and formulates the charge brought against the person against whom an administrative offense case is initiated.
As follows from the case file, in the protocol on administrative offense 22 AR No. 593498
executed in respect of Khlystova A.The. under part 3 of article 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the date of drawing up the protocol on an administrative offense - 10 hours 25 minutes December 27, 2014.
Meanwhile, according to the certificate of examination for alcohol intoxication 22 AT No. 113162 dated 27.12.2014, as well as the transcript of the result on paper, the examination in respect of Khlystova A.The. carried out at 10:42 a.m. December 27, 2014.
From the testimony of attesting witnesses Teplov V.G., Shvetsova P.A. it follows that when surveying Khlystov A.V. they were not present, the result of the examination was not brought to them, they did not see each other, they signed the act one by one at the request of the traffic police inspector.
Thus it is official traffic police during the examination of the state of intoxication in respect of Khlystova A.The. the Rules for Examining a Person Who Drives a Vehicle for the State of Intoxication and Recording Its Results, Referring the Said Person for a Medical Examination for the State of Intoxication, Medical Examination of This Person for the State of Intoxication and Registration of Its Results, approved by the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of 26.06 .2008 No. 475 (hereinafter - the Rules).
In this regard, the act of examination of the state of intoxication 22 AT № 113162 dated 27.12.2014 as not meeting the requirements of the law can not be accepted by the justice of the peace as evidence of guilt Khlystova A.The. in committing the offense imputed to him, given that, according to part 3 of article 26.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, it is not allowed to use evidence obtained in violation of the law.
In accordance with the provisions of Art. 1.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, a person is subject to administrative liability only for administrative offenses in respect of which his guilt has been established.
Irremovable doubts about the guilt of a person brought to administrative responsibility shall be interpreted in favor of this person.
On the basis of paragraph.2 h.1 Article.24.5 of the RF Code of Administrative Offenses proceedings in the case of an administrative offense can not be started, and initiated production is subject to termination due to the lack of an administrative offense.
Taking into account that the grounds for bringing to administrative responsibility for hours.Z Article. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses is the failure to comply with the Rules of the Road on the prohibition of the driver to consume alcoholic beverages, narcotic or psychotropic substances after a traffic accident in which he is involved, however, the commission of Khlystov A.The. traffic accident, as well as the use of alcoholic beverages after the incident, was not confirmed by the totality of the examined evidence in the case, the court concludes that the proceedings in the case of an administrative offense, under Part.Z Article. 12.27 RF Code of Administrative Offenses in respect of Khlystova A.The. subject to termination due to the absence of an administrative offense.
Guided by Article 4.5, Clause 2 4.1 Article 24.5, Part 2 of Article 29.9-29.11 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation,
decided:
Terminate administrative proceedings against Anton Vasilievich Khlystov under Part 3 of Art. 12.27 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation due to the absence of an administrative offense.
This decision may be appealed to the Petropavlovsk District Court of the Altai Territory within 10 days from the date of its delivery or receipt.
Magistrate Oh.The.
The decision has not entered into force.
