trial.

    On 30 December 2002 the trial resumed.

detention Lack of relevant and sufficient reasons for keeping the applicant in pre-trial detention for more than four years: violation Article 18 Restrictions for unauthorised purposes Pre-trial detention

    On 11 March 2011 the Court of Cassation upheld the trial court’s judgment. THE COURT’S ASSESSMENT 4.

appearing at the trial.

He remained in custody pending investigation and trial. 6.

    The application concerns the applicant’s trial in absentia on murder charges, having allegedly not being questioned during trial and on appeal.

The defence witnesses were all heard during the trial and provided the applicants’ alibis.

within a reasonable time or to release pending trial.

The legal aid order covered both the committal hearings and the actual trial.

The request was dismissed by the trial court.

been committed for trial by the magistrates' court.

B A, représenté par Me Trorial, demande au tribunal : 1) d'annuler pour excès de pouvoir l'arrêté en date du 19 mars 2025 par lequel le préfet de la Seine-Maritime a rejeté sa demande de délivrance d'un

A B, représenté par Me Trorial, demande au tribunal : 1°) d'annuler l'arrêté du 19 juillet 2022 par lequel le préfet de police a refusé de lui délivrer un titre de séjour, l'a obligé à quitter le territoire

The investigator referred the case for trial instead.

The trial judge left the courtroom and questioned S.N. in the presence of the trial secretary in a separate room.

They rely on Article   6   §   1 (right to a fair trial).

The court upheld the decision to remand him in pre-trial detention. 6.

The trial court initially rejected that request, referring to the police report.