Publications, 11:32 02/14/2018

Investigators can read correspondence from phones and tablets without court permission - CC

The Constitutional Court (CC) of the Russian Federation considers it possible for investigators to read correspondence from phones, tablets and computers without the appropriate permission of the court. The ruling of the Constitutional Court states that the inspection and examination of information located in the electronic memory of subscriber devices seized during investigative actions does not imply the issuance of a special court decision on this.

The court also reminds that a citizen dissatisfied with such actions has the legal right to challenge the actions of the investigation in court in accordance with Article 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Applicant's position

Dmitry Prozorovsky, who is serving a sentence of imprisonment, filed a complaint with the court. The applicant challenged three articles of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation - “Grounds for conducting an inspection” (Article 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure), “Procedure for conducting an inspection” (Article 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) and “Procedure for appointing a forensic examination” (Article 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).

The complaint states that the provisions of these articles do not immediately correspond to six articles of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, since, according to him, they violate the right to privacy of correspondence, postal, telegraph and other messages.

Prozorovsky believes that the controversial articles allow the possibility for the preliminary investigation body to obtain information about connections between subscriber devices, texts of correspondence, mail and other messages during the inspection and computer technical examination of seized subscriber devices, without obtaining a court decision.

As follows from the complaint, when considering the applicant’s criminal case, the courts of first and appellate instances refused to satisfy the demands of his defense to recognize as inadmissible evidence the inspection reports of electronic storage media containing information about the texts of messages. The courts motivated their refusal by the absence of the need to obtain a court decision for such an inspection.

The mystery of correspondence and the investigation

The Constitutional Court recalled that investigators examine objects in order to detect traces of a crime or clarify other circumstances relevant to the criminal case. According to the norms of the Code of Criminal Procedure, an inspection can be carried out before the initiation of a criminal case and at the place of investigative action.

Exceptional cases include cases where the inspection requires a long time or is difficult to carry out on site - then the items to be inspected must be seized, packaged, sealed, certified by the signature of the investigator, the definition says.

Moreover, the Constitutional Court points out, only those items that may be related to the criminal case are subject to seizure, and the protocol, if possible, indicates the individual characteristics and characteristics of the items being seized. Seized items can be the subject of forensic examination.

“Carrying out an inspection and examination in order to obtain information relevant to a criminal case located in the electronic memory of subscriber devices seized during investigative actions in the manner prescribed by law does not imply the issuance of a special court decision on this. Persons who believe that the conduct of appropriate investigative actions and the procedural decisions taken in this case are capable of causing damage to their constitutional rights, including the right to privacy of correspondence, postal, telegraph and other messages, can challenge these procedural decisions and investigative actions in court in the manner , provided for in Article 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation,” notes the Constitutional Court.

Thus, the norms challenged by the applicant cannot be regarded as violating his constitutional rights in the aspect indicated by him, and therefore his complaint does not meet the admissibility criterion, the court believes. In connection with which the Constitutional Court refused to accept the complaint for consideration, this determination is final and cannot be appealed.

inspection of items (documents)

(place of compilation)

(position of investigator (inquiry officer),

class rank or title, surname, initials)

in the presence of witnesses:

(last name, first name, patronymic

(last name, first name, patronymic

(procedural position, surname, name, patronymic of each person,

participating in the investigative action, and, if necessary, his address and other information about his identity)

(where and what exactly is also indicated, when, where and during production

(signature of witness)

(last name, first name, patronymic)

(specialist signature)

(which ones exactly)

(weather, light)

(what exactly, procedural actions are described

in the order in which they were produced, the significant

circumstances for this case, as well as statements (explanations) of the persons involved

in investigative action; technical means used during the investigation

actions, conditions and procedure for their use, objects to which these means were

applied and the results obtained)

(repacked (way), sealed

(which seal), certified by the signatures of witnesses and provided with an explanatory inscription about the contents of the package,

where they are sent or where they are stored)

(photography, video, audio recording, etc.)

(photographic negatives and photographs,

films, slides, phonograms, video cassettes, computer storage media,

(personal reading

(indicate the procedural status, surname and initials of the participant in the investigative action

(signature)

(signature)

Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, Article 183. Grounds and procedure for seizure

1. If it is necessary to seize certain items and documents that are important for a criminal case, and if it is known exactly where and who has them, they are seized.
2. Seizure is carried out in the manner established by Article 182 of this Code, with the exceptions provided for by this article.
3. Seizure of objects and documents containing state or other secrets protected by federal law, objects and documents containing information about deposits and accounts of citizens in banks and other credit organizations, as well as things pledged or deposited in a pawnshop, is carried out on the basis of a judicial decisions made in the manner established by Article 165 of this Code.

3.1. When making a seizure, the seizure of electronic storage media is carried out with the participation of a specialist. At the request of the legal owner of the seized electronic storage media or the owner of the information contained on them, the specialist participating in the seizure, in the presence of witnesses, copies information from the seized electronic storage media to other electronic storage media provided by the legal owner of the seized electronic storage media or the owner of the information contained on them . When making a seizure, copying information is not allowed if this may interfere with the investigation of a crime or, according to a specialist, lead to the loss or change of information. Electronic storage media containing copied information are transferred to the legal owner of the seized electronic storage media or the owner of the information contained on them. An entry is made in the protocol about the copying of information and the transfer of electronic media containing the copied information to the legal owner of the seized electronic media or the owner of the information contained on them.

1) On what grounds can an investigator seize a phone?

Based on the criminal case initiated and the corresponding resolution

2) And does he have the right to seize photos/videos and other information from the phone?

If it matters for a criminal case, yes, it does.

3) If yes, then should the investigator provide any documents confirming his right to commit such actions?

Resolution on seizure.

4) How can you appeal this kind of action?

In accordance with Art. 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation to the court, or to the head of the investigation department or to the prosecutor in accordance with Art. 124 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. But taking into account the provisions of Art. 38 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, I’ll tell you, the action is not very successful; the court usually refers to this paragraph when refusing to satisfy the complaint.

Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, Article 38. Investigator

1. An investigator is an official authorized, within the competence provided for by this Code, to carry out a preliminary investigation in a criminal case.

2. The investigator is authorized:
3) independently direct the course of the investigation, make decisions on investigative and other procedural actions, except for cases when, in accordance with this Code, it is necessary to obtain a court decision or the consent of the head of the investigative body;

Senior investigator of the Investigative Department of the RPTO OP No. 1 of the Investigative Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the city of Omsk, Lieutenant of Justice

(name of the preliminary investigation body,

Martynova D.I.

rank, surname, initials)

in the presence of witnesses:

1. Vladislav Evgenievich Friesen, living at the address: Omsk, st. 70 let Oktyabrya, 20, apt. 498

2. Klimenko Sergey Aleksandrovich, living at the address: Omsk, st. Yaltinskaya, 8

(last name, first name, patronymic and place of residence of the witness)

with the participation of a specialist - forensic expert of the ECC of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Omsk Region, police major Yurkova I.I.,

(procedural position, surnames, initials of the persons involved)

in accordance with Art. 164, part one of Art. 176, parts one - fourth and sixth art. 177
The Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation carried out an inspection in office No. 103 of the Omsk Academy of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia, at the address: Omsk, Komarova Ave., 7, inspected a cell phone discovered during an inspection of the scene of the incident in the service toilet of the Arena Omsk Sports Complex

about which, guided by Art. 166 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation compiled this protocol.

Before the inspection begins, the procedures for conducting it, as well as their rights and obligations, are explained to the participating persons.

(signature of witness)

(signature of witness)

Specialist (expert)

(last name, first name, patronymic)

his rights, duties and responsibilities provided for in Art. 58 (57) Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

(signature of a specialist (expert))

The participants were also informed about the use of technical equipment of the Canon EOS 650D Kit camera 18.50 million pixels, matrix: 22.3 x 14.9 mm, cards: SD, RAW support, shooting speed: 5 frames/s, video resolution up to 1920×1080 - by specialist I. Yurkova .AND

The inspection was carried out in natural light conditions

(illuminance)

Upon inspection it was established: A NOKIA brand cell phone in a black case, rectangular in shape, dimensions 96.5×46.5×16.4 mm, weight 125 grams. The phone is a slider, on the back surface of the device there is a built-in 3.2 megapixel camera lens, located on a silver-colored rectangular metal plate measuring 50 mm. At the bottom of the rear panel there are three oblong oval-shaped holes 5x1 mm, behind which the speaker is located. Battery Li-Ion 1110 mAh, gray. The phone screen measures 32x42 mm and has some damage in the form of scratches. Above the screen there is an earpiece, on both sides of which there is a light sensor and a built-in CIF camera for video calls. The phone's keyboard is made in a dark blue color scheme; no visible damage was found; the keyboard backlight is white. At the time of inspection, the cell phone was working and contained an MTS Omsk SIM card. During the inspection, specialist I.I. Yurkova found and seized them on the side surfaces of the phone. fingerprints on fingerprint film. The inspected phone is packaged in a plastic bag and placed in a cardboard box, which is sealed with a round seal No. 3, the box has an explanatory inscription: “Cell phone discovered during an inspection of the scene of the incident in the service toilet of the Arena Omsk Sports Complex, certified by the signatures of witnesses and the investigator and specialist. The fingerprints seized during the inspection of the phone on one fingerprint film are packed in a paper bag No. 1, which is sealed with thin paper with a seal imprint No. 3, on the bag there is an explanatory inscription: “Fingerprints discovered during an inspection of the crime scene on the body of the phone found when inspecting the scene of the incident in the office toilet of the Arena Omsk sports complex, certified by the signatures of witnesses and the investigator and specialist.

During the inspection, photography was carried out using a Canon EOS 650D Kit 18.50 million pixel camera, matrix: 22.3 x 14.9 mm, cards: SD, RAW support, shooting speed: 5 frames/s, video resolution up to 1920×1080, by specialist I. I. Yurkova. A total of 3 frames of film were used.

A photo table is attached to the inspection report

(photo tables, etc.)

The protocol was read personally

(in person or aloud by the investigator)

Comments to the protocol, no statements received

Witnesses:

(signature)

(signature)

Specialist (expert)

(signature)

Other persons involved:

(signature)

(signature)

inspection of items (documents)

Protocol *

inspection of items (documents)

The inspection began at 10:00 am.

The inspection ended at 11:15 a.m.

Investigator of the Investigative Committee of the Investigative Directorate at the Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ensk region, Captain of Justice Ivanov I.I., in connection with the criminal case No. 11111 he has in progress,

in the presence of witnesses:

1. Petrov Petr Petrovich, living at the address: Ensk, st. Sovetskaya, 3, apt. 17.

2. Sidorov Ivan Anatolyevich, living at the address: Ensk, st. Latyshskaya, 22 apt. 154,

with the participation of: forensic specialist expert of the ECC of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ensk region P.S. Korkina, in accordance with Art. 164, part one of Art. 176, parts one - fourth and sixth art. 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation carried out an inspection in the premises of the office No. 30 of the Investigative Committee of the Investigative Directorate at the Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ensk region, located at the address: Ensk, st. Tkachenko, 45, mobile phone brand “Nokia” model “6300”, having IMEI number: 357670017991620, which in accordance with Art. 166 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation compiled this protocol.

Before the start of the inspection, the witnesses were explained their rights, duties and responsibilities under Art. 60 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Witnesses: Petrov

Sidorov

Forensic specialist expert of the ECC of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ensk region, P.S. Korkin. his rights and obligations under Art. are explained. 58 (57) Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Specialist: Korkin

The participating persons were also informed about the use of technical means - a Canon camera by a forensic specialist, an expert from the ECC of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ensk region, P.S. Korkin.

The inspection was carried out in conditions of mixed sufficient lighting.

Inspection established:

In the presence of witnesses and a specialist, a paper envelope was opened, sealed with three stamps of the seal “For packages”. On the envelope there is the inscription: “Mobile phone “Nokia 6300” IMEI 357670017991620, seized on April 10, 2010 during a personal search of the suspect S.S. Skvortsov”; are signed by the investigator and witnesses. The envelope has no damage or tears; the integrity of the seal impressions on the envelope is not compromised.

When the envelope was opened, it contained a Nokia 6300 mobile phone in a silver-black case, 108.6 mm long, 53 mm wide, 18.7 mm thick, weighing 118 g, and has a rectangular stylized shape. All corners of the phone are rounded. The mobile phone is made of silver metal with black polymer inserts on the front side and metal on the sides and back.

At the start of the inspection, the mobile phone is turned off. No fingerprints or foreign substances were found on the phone.

On the body there are:

a) on the front side – a screen measuring 57x27, 16 keys on which there are Arabic numerals, Latin and thematic symbols, 1 joystick key. Above the screen there is a hole for the speaker and an inscription made in silver dye in Latin characters - “NOKIA”;

b) on the upper side of the case there is a key to turn the phone on/off;

c) on the right side of the case - a key - volume control;

d) the reverse side of the inspected mobile phone consists of:

— the main part of the phone body, made of shiny black metal, on which there is a square-shaped camera lens measuring 3x3 mm. Above the camera lens there is an inscription made in white dye in Latin characters - “NOKIA”.

- a cover made of silver metal, covering the compartment intended for the battery, on which there is an inscription made in brown dye in Arabic numerals and Latin symbols - “2 megapixel”. To the right of the camera lens there are 9 circular holes with a diameter of 0.3 mm. for speaker.

e) at the base of the inspected mobile phone there are two round and rectangular connectors for connecting additional equipment.

The phone does not turn on when you press the on/off key. When removing the battery compartment cover, a battery was found 5 mm long, 3.3 mm wide, 4 mm thick, made of black polymer, covered with adhesive glossy tape in light gray and dark gray colors. On the front of the battery there is the inscription “NOKIA”, BL-4C, as well as a holographic sticker. This sticker has an inscription in black Arabic numerals arranged in two rows: 1. “0705301113”; 2. "6846803956". On the back of the battery are the following symbols and numbers: “NOKIA BL-4C 860 mAh 3.7; RECHERGEBLE Li-on BATTERY. USE SPECIFIED NOKIA CHARGER ONLY. MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY.” Below is the following inscription, located in three rows: 1. “0670386417535”; 2. "0274B21463459". 3. "MADE IN CHINA".

When removing the battery, a strip of white glossy adhesive paper tape was found on the body of the mobile phone.

On the strip, Latin characters, as well as Arabic numerals and cryptographic symbols are made in black dye. The inscription is made in nine parallel lines: 1. “Nokia Corporation”, 2. “FCC ID: PPIRM-217” 3. “IC: 661AE-RH51” 4. “Type: RM-217” 5. “Model: 6300”; 6. "MADE IN HUNGARY"; 6. "SE 0434"; 7. Sign “PCT ME”; 8. Square-shaped cryptographic sign, “0537635”; 9. "IMEI: 357670/01/799162/0".

Below a strip of white glossy adhesive paper tape there is a cell (slot) for a SIM card. There is no SIM card in the cell.

On the right side of the SIM card slot there is a slot for installing a removable memory card. At the time of inspection, there was no miniature memory card (MicroSD) in the cell.

Special features of a mobile phone: On the rounded corner between the top and back of the case, there are 4 round chips with a diameter of 2 mm on the black shiny surface. every. The reverse side of the case has numerous small scratches and abrasions.

At the end of the inspection, the mobile phone was assembled and took its original form (the appearance before the inspection began).

During the inspection, the mobile phone was photographed according to the rules of detailed large-scale photography with a Canon digital camera on an MD-128 memory card and placed together with the opened packaging in a paper envelope with the inscription: “Mobile phone “Nokia 6300” IMEI 357670017991620, seized On April 10, 2011, during a search of the suspect S.S. Skvortsov. and examined on April 11, 2011.” The envelope is sealed and sealed with three stamps of the “For packages” seal.

The envelope and seals bear the signatures of witnesses and the investigator.

An illustrated table is attached to the inspection report.

During the course of the investigation, no statements or comments were received regarding the actions of the inspection participants or the correctness of the protocol.

Witnesses: Petrov

Sidorov

The protocol was presented for review to all persons participating in the investigative action.

PROTOCOL. inspection of objects and documents

At the same time, the indicated persons were explained their right to make comments on its addition and clarification, subject to inclusion in the protocol, agreed upon and certified by the signatures of these persons. Having become familiar with the protocol by personal reading at the end of the inspection, no statements or comments were received from the participating persons on the actions of the inspection participants and the correctness of the protocol.

Witnesses: Petrov

Sidorov

Specialist Korkin

Investigator Ivanov

Illustrated table

to inspect a mobile phone (m/t) “Nokia 6300” with serial number IMEI 357670017991620 in a silver-black case, seized on May 10, 2011 during a search from the suspect S.S. Skvortsov.

Illustration No. 1.

The envelope in which the Nokia 6300 m/t was found.

Illustration No. 2. Front side of the Nokia 6300 m/t

Illustration No. 3. Reverse side of m/t “Nokia 6300”

Illustration No. 4. Reverse side of the Nokia 6300 m/t without the back cover.

The photograph was taken and the illustrative table was compiled by a criminologist expert from the ECC of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ensk region _________ P.S. Korkin.

Investigator of the Investigative Committee of the Investigative Directorate at the Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ensk Region, Captain of Justice _____Ivanov I.I.

Continuation of the illustration table

to inspect the Nokia 6300 m/t with serial number IMEI 357670017991620 in a silver-black case, seized on May 10, 2011 during a search from the suspect S.S. Skvortsov.

Illustration No. 5. Reverse side of the Nokia 6300 m/t without back cover, without battery and without SIM card.

Illustration No. 6. The front side of the battery found in the Nokia 6300.

Investigator of the Investigative Committee of the Investigative Directorate at the Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ensk Region, Captain of Justice _____Ivanov I.I.

Continuation of the illustration table

to inspect the Nokia 6300 m/t with serial number IMEI 357670017991620 in a silver-black case, seized on May 10, 2011 during a search from the suspect S.S. Skvortsov.

Illustration No. 7. The reverse side of the battery found in the Nokia 6300.

Illustration No. 8. The envelope in which the Nokia 6300 m/t was packed.

The photograph was taken and the illustrative table was compiled by a criminologist expert from the ECC of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ensk region ________ Korkin P.S.

Investigator of the Investigative Committee of the Investigative Directorate at the Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Ensk Region, Captain of Justice _____Ivanov I.I.

* Each page of the protocol is signed by witnesses.

Mybiblioteka.su - 2015-2018. (0.116 sec.)

PROTOCOL of inspection of items (documents)

Inspection started: 10 a.m. 30 min.

Inspection completed: 11 a.m. 05 min.

Investigator of the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Ensk Region, Lieutenant of Justice Ryzhkov A.P. in connection with his pending criminal case No. 286663

in the presence of witnesses:

1) Nepoklonov Vladimir Borisovich, living: Ensk-32, st. Krasnykh Zori, 83a, apt. 18;

2) Vakhmistrov Igor Viktorovich, living: Ensk-33, st. Krupskaya, 19, apt. 11,

with the participation of a forensic expert ECO at the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Ensk region, police captain P.G. Rodenkov, in accordance with Art. 164, part.

Illegal practice of recording personal correspondence of citizens on mobile devices

1 tbsp. 176, part 1 - 4 and 6 art. 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, carried out an inspection in the office. 325 From the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia in the Ensk region seized on October 2, 201* from gr. Panina I.I. by removing the certificate No. 15 IT "Enskavtotrans".

At the very beginning of the inspection, the participating persons are explained their rights, duties and responsibilities, as well as the procedure for inspecting objects (documents).

In addition, before the start of the inspection, the witnesses were explained their rights, duties and responsibilities, including those provided for in Art. 60 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

V.B. Nepoklonov
I.V. Vakhmistrov

The investigator verified the competence of Pavel Grigorievich Rodenkov as a specialist, found out his relationship to the suspect, accused and victim and explained his rights, duties and responsibilities, including those provided for in Art. 58 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Specialist P.G. Rodenkov

The participants were also informed about the use of technical means: a Sony M-12 video camera by specialist P.G. Rodenkov.

The inspection was carried out in clear sunny weather with good natural light.

The inspection established: driver's service license No. 15 IS "Enskavtotrans" in the name of Vasin G.Yu. is a rectangular card measuring 87x60 mm. The document's columns are filled in by hand with blue dye. On the left half of the open ID there is a photo of Mr. Panina I.I., sealed with a round seal. The seal imprint on the photo card is made with violet dye, and the seal imprint on the ID form is blue. On the same side of the service ID there is the entry “Russian Federation”, below “Ministry of Road Transport”, even lower, respectively, “Ensk Territorial Association”, “Motor Transport”, “Enskavtotrans”, “OFFICIAL IDENTIFICATION N 15”, “Comrade. Vasin G.Yu.”, “works in a/k 1809 ATP”, “as a driver” and “chief of ATP”. Opposite the last of the entries is an illegible signature. On the other side of the certificate there is the inscription “This certificate gives the right to travel without a ticket on city and suburban buses.”

During the inspection, video recording was made.

A video cassette “Sony-E-180” is attached to the inspection report.

Before, during or at the end of the inspection from the participating persons: witnesses Nepoklonov V.B. and Vakhmistrov I.V., as well as specialist Rodenkov P.G. no applications were received.

At the end of the inspection, the protocol of the investigative action is presented to its participants for reading, and the relevant video recording materials are presented for review.

The protocol was read aloud by the investigator, and the video recordings were reproduced. There are no comments to the protocol.

Witnesses: V.B. Nepoklonov I.V. Vakhmistrov Specialist: P.G. Rodenkov

This protocol has been drawn up in accordance with Art. 166 and 180 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Investigator of the Investigation Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Ensk Region, Lieutenant of Justice A.P. Ryzhkov

Comments:

HomeQuestions and orders How legal are the actions of the Investigative Committee? Phone was confiscated and not returned

How legal are the actions of the investigative committee? Phone was confiscated and not returned

I, a police officer, in relation to whom there was operational information about involvement in a crime, had a cell phone confiscated, along with the SIM card that I used. The wording is “for computer-technical events.” The Investigative Committee investigator's order only listed a telephone number. Previously, I was interrogated in a criminal case, my status is as a witness. After the seizure, I wrote a statement about illegality and asked to return the phone and SIM card. The very next day the refusal was made. I appealed the decision to the court. The phone has not been returned to me for 2.5 months.

inspection of items (documents)

In court, the Investigative Committee wants to convey that the SIM card was confiscated because it is an integral part of the phone. How legal are the actions of the insurance company? I believe that my rights to privacy were violated and I suffered moral harm.

Lawyers' answers

8460 lawyers are waiting for you Quick response, for free!

Iskenderov Emil Eldarovich (04/10/2014 at 10:02:44)

If this is material evidence, then its storage is carried out in accordance with the provisions of Article 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation

Alexey (04/10/2014 at 10:18:47)

Neither the phone nor the SIM card were recognized as material evidence in my case. Operational information was received regarding me that I could know about the persons who committed this crime. In order to conduct an examination, their seizure was scheduled. But whether it should be ordered by the court, and whether the SIM card is an integral part of the phone, it was not in the investigator’s decision.

Kirsanov Sergey Ivanovich (04/10/2014 at 13:02:57)

Hello Alexey! As a police officer, you most likely know yourself that the investigation must check any information relevant to the case, including operational information. In exceptional cases, in accordance with Part 5 of Article 165 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, seizure and confiscation of things can be carried out on the basis of a decision of the investigator with subsequent (within 24 hours) notification of the court. Confiscating your phone with a SIM card is the simplest, but for sure not the only way to check operational information. Things may be admitted as evidence at any time before the case is dismissed or sent to court. Material evidence in accordance with Part 1 of Article 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation is stored in a criminal case until it is terminated or a verdict is passed in court. Therefore, the events you describe at least seem quite legal. If you think that the investigation against you is being conducted biasedly, you can consider the grounds for challenging the investigator on the basis of Article 61 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. But you should take into account that even if the investigator shares operational information with you, it will only be to the extent necessary to justify the investigative action, in your case - the seizure of the phone and SIM card. If the SIM card was in your phone at the time of seizure and you used it to contact people of interest to the investigation, then most likely the court will not pay attention to your claim. It would be another matter if the SIM card lay separately from the phone in addition to the one inserted.

All articles Some features of the inspection of cellular communications during the investigation of criminal cases (Vasyukov V.F., Bulyzhkin A.V.)

Wireless communication systems, the result of intensive development of telecommunications and computer technologies, are now widespread throughout the world. Moreover, information and modern information and telecommunication technologies are one of the important factors in the functioning of society in the 21st century. Their importance is increasing, and technical capabilities are constantly expanding, so they are the most used tool in human communication and are very actively used by criminal structures in the implementation of their criminal plans. Meanwhile, high-performance, multifunctional and, of course, information-intensive models of communicators, which have rapidly replaced traditional mobile phones from the everyday life of citizens, are now replete with information about users who at some point in their lives can become suspects, witnesses, and victims of crimes.
In such cases, an integral investigative action in a criminal case is the inspection of a discovered or seized cellular communication device, which, as a rule, is divided into several stages:
1. External inspection. At the stage of external inspection, a direct study and recording of the external structure and condition of the device takes place, within the framework of which the brand, model, type, shape of the device, body color, size are indicated in the protocol; presence of rear and (or) front photo/video camera (flash) lenses, brand names, logo, designations; number and location of functional, built-in, touch keys (joystick); Mini(Micro)USB connectors, charger, stereo headphones; presence of holes for speaker, microphone, distance sensor, ambient light. Special signs of the external structure are indicated separately: damage - chips, scratches, abrasions, lack of proper elements; the presence of additional attributes and technical components - a case, cord, keychain, headset, polymer stickers, graphic inserts, inscriptions, inlay with precious metals, etc. During the external inspection, detailed photography of the external, back, and side panels of the mobile phone is carried out. If the phone being inspected is a folding (“butterfly”) or sliding type (“slider”), the phone is photographed in its original and folding/sliding state.
2. Structural inspection. At this stage, the phone structure is inspected in parts - the back cover of the phone and (or) the battery (in certain models of cellular devices the battery is built into the body or in the back cover), flash cards, SIM cards (s). When inspecting a battery, the protocol should indicate its identification number, type, brand, model, power, and other information indicated on the case.

Protocol for inspection and listening to a phonogram (filling sample)

The protocol also indicates the color and generic material from which the battery is made. When inspecting a flash card (MiniSD), you need to pay attention to its identification number, volume, color and generic case material. The SIM card found in the phone is inspected in a similar way. As a rule, on the body of the SIM card there is a logo of the cellular operator, a description of which is also required in the protocol.
During the structural inspection, a detailed photograph is taken of the outer and back sides of the battery, flash card, SIM card, as well as the back side of the mobile phone case (without the back cover) so that the IMEI number of the device is visible in the photo.
3. Inspection of the information environment. Inspection of the phone's information environment includes studying and recording information contained in the memory of the mobile phone, flash card, SIM card. If during the inspection the investigator managed to turn on the mobile phone and gained access to the information contained in it, the protocol records in chronological order all subsequent manipulations with the device.
In investigative practice, situations often arise in which, during the initial investigative actions, several cellular communication devices are confiscated at once while they are on. In such cases, it is not advisable to turn off mobile phones before inspection (turning off can occur when removing the battery, SIM card, viewing the IMEI code on a sticker located on the inside of the phone panel, etc.), because subsequent activation will require locking codes (PINs) that can only be known by its last user (suspect, witness or victim). The latter’s refusal to provide information on unlocking the phone may exclude the possibility of an immediate full study of its information content (electronic address book, incoming and outgoing connections, SMS, MMS messages, E-mail, voice mail, photo, video files, voice recordings, organizer etc., depending on the phone model). Therefore, it is important to emphasize that if the phone was turned on at the time of the inspection, then a constructive inspection should be carried out only after studying its information environment.
It seems especially significant to focus on the fact that if data on incoming and outgoing connection signals of telephone sets of specific communication users are important for a criminal case, then in the absence of the consent of the legal owner of the mobile phone, the investigator can examine this kind of information only by court decision. The mandatory implementation of this provision corresponds with the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, expressed in the Determination of October 2, 2003 N 345-O: “... information constituting the confidentiality of telephone conversations protected by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the laws in force on the territory of the Russian Federation is considered any information transmitted, stored and installed using telephone equipment, including data on incoming and outgoing connection signals of telephone sets of specific communication users; To access this information, authorities carrying out operational investigative activities must obtain a court decision. Otherwise would mean non-compliance with the requirement of Article 23 (Part 2) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation on the possibility of restricting the right to privacy of telephone conversations only on the basis of a court decision.”
Thus, if the owner of a mobile phone refuses to give consent to examine it, but if it is necessary to conduct an examination due to its urgency, the investigator may be guided by the requirements of Part 5 of Art. 165 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.
The inspection of the information environment must begin by indicating in the protocol the procedure for unlocking the phone's keyboard, listing the graphic and text elements that appeared on its screen after unlocking. Then the IMEI number of the mobile phone is checked by pressing the key combination *#06# (the fifteen-digit number should be displayed on the phone screen).
If the phone is not protected by a password, then the inspection report sequentially indicates the information contents of the phone - a list of contacts, messages, the presence of images, photographs, videos, etc. When describing a specific contact, its type (incoming, outgoing, unanswered), time, duration, data of the subscriber with whom the contact was made, as well as his subscriber number are indicated (the description of the message excludes the indication of duration, but includes text (SMS) and (or) graphic content (MMS)).
The description of graphic images and photographs consists of the following elements: an indication of what or who is depicted, type, size, time of file creation (the description of videos includes, in addition to the indicated duration).
Let us recall that to extract and analyze information data from cellular communications of any type and type in investigative and expert practice, special devices are widely used (“Mobile Forensic Investigator”, “UFED”, “XRY”, etc.), allowing you to enter the operating system in bypassing (or recognizing) passwords and logins, work with mobile devices without a battery, or separately with a SIM card. Therefore, if access to the information environment of a mobile phone is difficult, then to participate in the inspection it is necessary to involve a specialist who has the skills to use these devices.
During the inspection of the phone's information environment, step-by-step detailed photography of the mobile phone screen with information of importance for the criminal case is carried out. To visually record a large amount of information contained in the information environment of the phone, video recording should be used. In this case, the investigator must comment on all actions that are aimed at obtaining this or that information using telephone manipulations.

Literature

1. Baturin S.S. On the issue of retrieving information from technical communication channels // Legal issues of communication. 2011. N 2. P. 12.
2. Ruling of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of October 2, 2003 N 345-O “On the refusal to accept for consideration the request of the Sovetsky District Court of the city of Lipetsk to verify the constitutionality of part four of Article 32 of the Federal Law of February 16, 1995 “On Communications” // Russian Aerospace Forces.

2004. N 1. P. 50 - 52.
3. Skobelin S.Yu. Legal basis and procedural design for the extraction and analysis of data from mobile devices // Investigation of crimes: problems and ways to solve them: Collection of scientific and practical works. Vol. 1. M.: Buki Vedi, 2013. P. 183.

If you do not find the information you need on this page, try using the site search: