CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 1 décembre 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sF5299C86 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid }   Communicated on 1 December 2016   THIRD SECTION Application no. 61558/15 Anton Olegovich BARANOV against Russia lodged on 30 November 2015 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Anton Olegovich Baranov, is a Russian national who was born in 1984. On 3 March 2015 the Proletarskiy District Court in Tula found the applicant guilty of corruption and sentenced him to three years’ imprisonment and a fine. The applicant was taken into custody. On 3 June 2015 the Tula Regional Court upheld the conviction on appeal. On 15 September 2015 the Presidium of the Tula Regional Court quashed the appeal judgment of 3 June, finding that the appeal court had failed to examine some grounds of appeal. It referred the case for a new appeal hearing, without giving any indication as to the measure of restraint. Counsel for the applicant complained to the supervising prosecutor and to the president of the Regional Court that the applicant continued to be detained unlawfully, without a judicial decision on the custodial measure. His complaint did not elicit any response. On 21 October 2015 the Regional Court held a new appeal hearing and upheld the applicant’s conviction. COMPLAINTS The applicant complains under Article 5 of the Convention that his detention in the period from 15 September to 21 October 2015 had been unlawful.           Questions to the parties   Was the applicant’s detention compatible with the requirements of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, what was the legal basis for the applicant’s detention in the period from 15 September to 21 October 2015?