CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 5 juillet 2019

.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 5 July 2019   THIRD SECTION Application no. 19872/18 Oleg Viktorovich MOROZOV against Russia lodged on 25 April 2018 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns absence of the applicant’s lawyer from appeal hearings in his criminal case, while the prosecutor attended and made submissions. QUESTION tO THE PARTIES Given the seriousness of what was at stake for the applicant and the fact that he had had a legal representative during the first-instance proceedings, was the lack of legal assistance at the appeal hearings compatible with the requirements of Article 6 § 3 (c)?