The Appeal Court and the Supreme Court confirmed the trial court’s judgment.

In appeals against conviction following a plea of guilty, the somewhat mechanical test of whether a change of plea to guilty was ‘founded upon’ a particular feature of the trial, namely a wrong direction

and a not guilty verdict. 44.

A conviction may be unsafe even where there is no doubt about guilt but the trial process has been ‘vitiated by serious unfairness or significant legal misdirection’ ...

       The Government submit that Article 6 para. 2 (Art. 6-2) of the Convention is concerned with the manner in which guilt is determined at trial and not with the question of

On conclusion of the trial the applicants were found guilty and sentenced to fifteen and twenty-five years’ imprisonment respectively.

On 30 September 2003 he was committed to stand trial before the Leninskiy District Court of Smolensk.

At the trial hearing the incriminating report was discussed by the applicant’s expert, who defended his own findings.

  The Applicant was not released from prison, however, as the charges against him of robbery had been separated from the charges of severe theft in the trial of ..

During that conversation A.B. did not deny that he had offered to the applicant to go on a trip with his family and the applicant had refused A.B.’s offer.

On 22   December 1995 the Riga Regional Court found him guilty of this offence and sentenced him to five years' imprisonment.

to the effect that she had last seen Sejdo Nadarevic in mid-February 1996 was in the end disproved by the witnesses who gave evidence at the trial.”

final, the president of the panel sets a date for a pre-trial hearing, where the accused should make a statement regarding his guilt and the proceedings.

    Having been officially indicted on 9   March   2009, the applicant pleaded not guilty at the ensuing trial. 9.

E, de Me Trémouilles, représentant la commune de Trégastel et de Me Guillois, représentant M. C. Une note en délibéré, présentée pour M. E, a été enregistrée le 27 juin 2023.

According to section 71A of the 1957 Act, the Reviewing Authority can also quash any guilty verdict and associated sentence and make an order authorising a re-trial under the same conditions as the Courts-Martial

At trial, she denied her guilt and asserted that, contrary to what the witness Mr E. had stated at the hearing, the money she had received (35,000 euros) from the latter on 26 April 2010 was not a payment

court to establish his guilt, thus rendering his conviction unfair.

(b)     The applicant’s removal from the courtroom : The closing arguments were an important stage of the trial.

He remained the applicant's counsel for the rest of the trial.