Criminal defence attorneys

Team

Yurii Zhuk

READ MORE

Kostiantyn Chetvertak

READ MORE

Work algorithm

Cases

• Refusal to issue an international passport

Problem:

In this rather uncommon case, the attorney had to defend not only the rights and interests of his clients but also his own. While abroad, the attorney - just like his clients - applied to the state enterprise «Document» to obtain an international passport. However, despite the passports already being produced, the officials of the enterprise categorically refused to issue them without military registration documents - a requirement that did not exist at the time the passports were applied for.

Solution:

As part of the pre-trial settlement process, the attorney submitted written requests to the State Migration Service of Ukraine and the state enterprise «Document» demanding that the international passports be immediately forwarded and issued. As expected, these requests were ignored by the authorities. Without hesitation, the attorney filed an administrative lawsuit. The legal position was based on a fundamental principle: the law has no retroactive effect. At the time the applications for the international passport were submitted, Ukrainian legislation did not contain any requirement to present military registration documents in order to receive it.

Result:

The court agreed with the attorney’s arguments, declared the inaction of the authorities unlawful, and ordered the international passport to be issued. This decision became a precedent - afterward, similar lawsuits began to appear en masse. Under public pressure and multiple court rulings, the state enterprise «Document» eventually fulfilled its obligations and issued international passports to everyone who had applied before the new requirements concerning military registration documents were introduced.

• Purchase and possession of psilocybin mushrooms

Problem:

The Client sought legal assistance at the stage of being served with a notice of suspicion for the unlawful acquisition and possession of a psychotropic substance, namely psilocybin mushrooms, in a large quantity (Part 2 of Article 309 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine). The sanction of this article provides for a fine ranging from UAH 34,000 to UAH 85,000, or imprisonment for up to 3 years.

Solution:

During the provision of professional legal assistance, the defence team conducted its own investigation and collected evidence that refuted the prosecution’s claims regarding the place and time of the alleged offence. The defence obtained video footage and written documents confirming that the Client was in an entirely different location than the one stated in the detention report, the crime scene inspection, the notice of suspicion, and the indictment. Additional evidence was also gathered, significantly weakening the prosecution’s position.

Result:

The trial in the court of first instance lasted almost five years. During this period, the prosecutor managed to question only two attesting witnesses. Numerous hearings were postponed due to the prosecution’s inability to ensure the appearance of its own witnesses. As for the defence witnesses, it is ironic that they would have been the same police officers who detained the Client. Given the Client’s psychological and moral exhaustion from the lengthy proceedings, the defence decided to file a motion requesting his release from criminal liability. The court subsequently granted the motion and released the Client (without establishing guilt) from criminal liability due to the expiration of the statute of limitations, as more than five years had passed since the date of the alleged offence.

• Failure to provide assistance to a person in a dangerous condition

Problem:

The Client witnessed a situation in which the Victim, without any external involvement, fell out of a ninth-floor window and miraculously survived. Shocked and panicked by what he saw, the Client failed to provide the necessary assistance and left the scene.

Solution:

The prosecution immediately initiated an investigation into the alleged infliction of negligent grievous bodily injury under Article 128 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, and the Client became the primary candidate for suspect status, as he was the only eyewitness to the incident. However, over eight years of pre-trial investigation, neither the investigators nor the prosecutors were able to obtain evidence of the Client’s guilt. As a result, the case was reclassified under Article 136 of the Criminal Code, and the Client was notified of suspicion for failing to provide assistance to a person in a life-threatening condition when he had the opportunity to do so.

Result:

Given the lengthy duration of the pre-trial investigation and owing to a strategically built defence, the court released the Client from criminal liability, without establishing any admission of guilt, due to the expiration of the statute of limitations.

• Manslaughter through negligence

Problem:

In this case, we represented the interests of the Victim, who suffered an irreparable loss - his son was killed by a minor through negligence (Part 1 of Article 119 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine).

Solution:

During the pre-trial investigation, the defence team collected a number of pieces of evidence confirming the Victim’s expenses and filed a civil claim for compensation of material and moral damages. The court of first instance, after examining the case, granted the civil claim but imposed a sentence on the accused that did not involve actual imprisonment. Disagreeing with this part of the judgment, we filed an appeal.

Result:

The Court of Appeal upheld the appeal, overturned the district court’s ruling in the part concerning the imposed sentence, and sentenced the accused to 4 years of actual imprisonment. Following the review by the Supreme Court, this decision remained unchanged.

• Hooliganism and infliction of bodily injuries

Problem:

The Client was charged with committing acts of hooliganism involving the use of a special object to inflict bodily harm, as well as with intentionally causing a moderate bodily injury. These offences, under Part 4 of Article 296 and Part 1 of Article 122 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, carried a potential sentence of up to 7 years of imprisonment.

Solution:

Through the qualified work of the defence team, the charge under Part 4 of Article 296 was reclassified to Part 1 of Article 296 of the Criminal Code, and the criminal proceedings in this part were closed due to the expiration of the statute of limitations. Regarding Part 1 of Article 122, the Supreme Court imposed a final sentence of 1 year of restriction of liberty, while releasing the Client from serving the imposed sentence with a probation period of 2 years.

Result:

Instead of facing 7 years of actual imprisonment, the Client was sentenced to 1 year of restriction of liberty and released from serving the sentence on the condition that he does not commit a new offence during the 2-year probation period.

• Driving a vehicle while under the influence of narcotic substances

Problem:

The police issued a protocol against the Client under Part 1 of Article 130 of the Code of Administrative Offences (driving a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or narcotic substances) and seized his driver’s licence. It should be noted that the Client refused to undergo a drug intoxication test.

Solution:

After thoroughly examining the case file in court, the defence concluded that the police officers’ assertion that the Client had refused to undergo a drug intoxication test was inaccurate. In fact, the officers failed to explain that refusal to undergo the test is legally equivalent to driving while under the influence of narcotic substances, thereby violating the Client’s rights. In addition, the defence identified several procedural violations in the preparation of the protocol and filed a motion requesting that the case be closed.

Result:

The Client’s driver’s licence was returned, and the case was closed due to the absence of the elements of an administrative offence in the Client’s actions.

• Knowingly false report of a crime

Problem:

Without fully understanding the situation, the Client contacted the police and reported that a crime had been committed against him. The report turned out to be false. As a result, the Client’s actions were classified under Part 1 of Article 383 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, and the prosecutor brought formal charges.

Solution:

The Client’s timely request for legal assistance allowed the defence to properly build a strategy in the case, file motions for additional investigative actions, including witness interviews, and collect the necessary written evidence that mitigated the Client’s liability. Moreover, at the preparatory court hearing, the defence succeeded in having the indictment returned to the prosecutor due to clear procedural violations in its preparation. Owing to the correctly chosen defence tactics, the prosecutor was unable to prove the Client’s guilt, as the statute of limitations had expired by the time the case reached court.

Result:

The Client was released from criminal liability.

• Dissemination of false information on the Internet and in the media

Problem:

False information concerning the Client and his business was published in the mass media and on the Internet. The publications contained statements and assessments that did not correspond to reality, negatively affected the Client’s honour, dignity, and business reputation, and had the potential to cause additional harm to his professional activity and business interests.

Solution:

The defence team conducted a detailed analysis of all publications and materials, identifying the false components. The disputed information was then submitted for expert examination to confirm its inaccurate nature. After receiving the expert’s conclusion, a lawsuit for the protection of the Client’s honour, dignity, and business reputation was prepared and filed with the court, with a clear justification of the falsity of the disseminated statements and the need for their retraction.

Result:

The court found the information published about the Client to be false and ordered the defendant to retract it in the same manner in which it was disseminated. The court also awarded the Client compensation for moral damages and the costs of professional legal assistance.

• Late submission of an income declaration

Problem:

The Client, being a public official, faced the risk of administrative liability for violating financial control requirements - the late submission of a declaration of assets and income, an offence provided for under Part 1 of Article 172-6 of the Code of Administrative Offences.

Solution:

The defence team promptly collected the necessary documents and evidence confirming the absence of intent in the Client’s actions and pointed to circumstances that objectively affected the timing of the declaration’s submission. During the court hearing, it was proven that the delay resulted solely from technical and organisational factors, which exclude any possibility of intentional misconduct.

Result:

The court accepted the defence’s arguments and closed the case due to the absence of the elements of an administrative offence in the Client’s actions.

• Driving a vehicle while intoxicated

Problem:

Based on a medical examination report, the police drew up a protocol against the Client under Part 1 of Article 130 of the Code of Administrative Offences (driving a vehicle while intoxicated) and seized his driver’s licence.

Solution:

To build an effective defence in court and obtain the necessary information, more than ten attorney requests were sent to state authorities, as a result of which proper and admissible evidence was obtained. In court, the defence demonstrated the unlawfulness of the medical examination, as well as the lack of proper competence of the doctor who conducted it, which led to the evidence being recognised as inadmissible.

Result:

Due to the Client’s timely request for legal assistance and the meticulous work of the defence team, the case was closed owing to the absence of the elements of an administrative offence, and the Client’s driver’s licence was returned.

• Road traffic accident resulting in bodily injuries

Problem:

The Client violated traffic safety rules, which resulted in a moderate bodily injury - an offence under Part 1 of Article 286 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The potential penalties included a fine, corrective labour, arrest, or restriction of liberty with deprivation of the right to drive vehicles.

Solution:

During the pre-trial investigation, the Client fully compensated the victim for medical expenses as well as moral (non-pecuniary) damages. In addition, the defence team collected evidence that supported the Client’s position and demonstrated his positive character. During the court proceedings, the defence filed a motion to release the Client from criminal liability on the grounds of reconciliation between the Client and the victim.

Result:

The Client was released from criminal liability and avoided deprivation of the right to drive vehicles.

• Drug possession case

Problem:

The Client was accused by the pre-trial investigation authorities of committing an offense under Part 1 of Article 309 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine - possession of narcotic substances without intent to distribute.

Solution:

The defense attorneys promptly developed a defense strategy and carried out comprehensive work to collect the necessary evidence, including certificates that positively characterized the Client and mitigated his liability. By the time the case was heard in court, the Client had already begun a drug addiction treatment program. During the court hearing, the attorneys submitted all relevant documentation confirming the Client’s treatment, and on this basis filed a motion requesting his release from criminal liability.

Result:

The Client was released from criminal liability and successfully overcame his drug addiction, receiving an important life lesson and avoiding adverse legal consequences.

• Burglary with unlawful entry into a dwelling

Problem:

The prosecution charged the Client with an offense under Part 3 of Article 185 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine - burglary with unlawful entry into a dwelling. For this offense, the Client faced a potential sentence of 3 to 6 years of imprisonment.

Solution:

The defense attorneys began representing the Client at the stage of court proceedings, during which he remained in a pre-trial detention center (SIZO). Given the complexity of the situation, the defense team promptly conducted an in-depth analysis of the criminal case materials and determined a strategic position for the case. They collected additional mitigating evidence, including documents and characteristics that portrayed the Client positively, and also persuaded him to compensate the victim for the damages incurred.

Result:

Following the court hearing, the Client received a sentence of 6 months of detention, instead of the realistic 3 to 6 years of imprisonment that he initially faced. The prosecutor agreed with the court’s decision and did not file an appeal.

• Infliction of bodily injuries and moral damages

Problem:

The Client was charged with intentionally inflicting minor bodily injury, an offence under Part 1 of Article 125 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. In addition, the victim filed a civil claim seeking ₴50,000 in moral (non-pecuniary) damages.

Solution:

After being served with a notice of suspicion, the Client did not dispute the fact of the conflict and admitted his involvement. Nevertheless, the defence team developed a well-considered strategy based on a thorough analysis of the evidence and procedural time limits. Owing to the correctly chosen defence tactics, the Client was released from criminal liability due to the expiration of the statute of limitations.

Result:

The Client was relieved from criminal liability, and the victim’s civil claim for moral damages was left without consideration by the court.