The dissertation is the first qualifying scientific work in Ukraine, after the entry into force the CPC of Ukraine from 2012, in which, on the basis of a complex analysis of problems of normative, legal and law enforcement nature, the concept of expert opinion in the criminal process was developed and substantiated.
On the basis of the scientists works the evolution of the expert opinion as a source of evidences was described in the dissertation.
On the basis of the complex approach, the essence of the expert opinion is disclosed with the help of its essential elements as well as the features. The author's definition of the expert opinion is given and under which it is proposed to understand the procedural act, which drawn up on the results of the use of special knowledge, within the competence of the expert and the questions, posed to him, which based on the information, which he perceived directly or which became known to him during the research of the objects, given to him, and contains a detailed description of the research, conducted by the expert, and the conclusions, drawn from their results, the justified answers to the questions, put before him in the document about the appointment of examination (or about the involvement of expert). The author's concept of the expert opinion as a source of evidences in the criminal process is proposed.
The structure of the expert opinion as the source of evidences was characterized and normatively fixed requirements to the content of its obligatory parts (introductory, research and final) were examined. The criteria for classifying of the expert opinion are singled out and the types of the expert opinion, which are drawn out on the basis of each of the classification criteria, are characterized.
The system of procedural properties and characteristics of the expert opinion is established and their content is carried out. Taking into account the obtained results, the concepts of affiliation, admissibility and admissibility of the expert opinion as its individual procedural properties and characteristics are determined and the content of sufficiency as a system characteristic of the set of evidences is disclosed.
The features of the procedural form of obtaining an expert opinion are investigated. In particular, the procedural aspect of its obtaining is disclosed by separating the groups of actions of the subjects of proof and expert, involved in conducting an examination.
A general characteristic of the verification of the expert opinion completed and in within it the methods of verification of this source of evidences is summarized and to their number it is proposed to include its analysis, synthesis, comparison with other evidences and obtaining new evidences through the conduct of investigative (search) and other procedural actions during the pre-trial investigation and the judicial actions during the trial.
The purpose, subject and order of the interrogation of the expert as one of the main ways of verification of the expert opinion are revealed. The theoretical developments on the content of the interrogation of the expert have been improved.
The conditions and grounds for the appointment of additional examination and re-examination as the main methods of verification of the expert opinion are disclosed.
The assessment of the expert opinion as a source of evidences are described. The legal consequences of recognizing of the expert opinion as inappropriate, inadmissible and unreliable evidence are determined. The legal consequences of recognizing the expert opinion as unreliable evidence are outlined depending of the grounds for acceptance by the subject of the proof of such a decision.
The theoretical positions to determining of the direction of using the expert opinion has been further developed. In particular, the directions of its use are disclosed in four aspects: a criminal law, a criminal procedural, a forensic and a criminalistics.
The scientifically substantiated proposals, aimed at improving the CPC of Ukraine in terms of defining of the concept of the expert opinion, the grounds for conducting of the examination, the procedure for initiating of its conduct, the grounds and procedure for conducting an interrogation of the expert and the appointment of additional examination and re-examination are developed.
