CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 octobre 2017

.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 }   Communicated on 19 October 2017   THIRD SECTION Application no. 75954/14 Nikolay Georgiyevich MOROZOV against Russia lodged on 17 November 2014 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE On 17 February 2014 a court convicted the applicant of a criminal offence and sentenced him to imprisonment. In the same judgment the court ordered that the applicant be taken into custody. This decision was enforced immediately. The applicant’s appeal against it was not processed. On 26   May 2014 the appeal court upheld the applicant’s conviction and the sentence. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Was the trial court’s order to take the defendant into custody amenable to appeal under Russian law? If yes, could this appeal procedure result in the convicted defendant’s release prior to the appeal decision on the charges against him?   2.1.     Was Article 5 § 4 of the Convention applicable following conviction of a defendant by a trial court?   2.2.     Was there a violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention in the present case on account of the refusal to examine the appeal against the detention order or the length of the appeal proceedings (which, presumably, addressed the arguments against this detention order)?