Published a decision of the appeal against Alexei Navalny:
“As the court is correctly established, after passing the inpatient treatment and extracts from the clinic.
He did not provide information about the place of his further stay in the penal inspection, he did not notify his actual place of residence in a timely manner for two months.
By virtue of the provisions of Part 3 of Art. 74 of the Criminal Code, h.ch. 5 and 6 tbsp. 190 HEC of the Russian Federation, conventionally convicted during the trial period, also systematically did not systematically fulfill the long -term (more than 30 days) duties assigned to him by the court and inspection, and disappeared from control, since its location was not established for more than 30 days, which is also undoubtedly an independent basis for the court decisions on the cancellation of conditional condemnation and execution of the punishment assigned by the court sentence.
The court considers the arguments about the continued treatment of the convicted person to be insolvent, since outpatient treatment does not exempt the convicted person from the obligation to independently and timely inform the criminal-correctional inspection about the location and the reasons that impede registration on the days strictly established by the inspection.
Continuation after discharge of outpatient treatment in the same clinic., According to the court of appeal, did not prevent the criminal-executive inspection on the place of its further location …
The court of appeal takes into account the materials and testimonies of the representative of the FSIN, according to which, during the entire trial period, the convicts allowed a significant number of violations of public order, which also indicates the systemic nature of violations and the unwillingness of the convict to embark on the path of correction “
“ВЧК ОГПУ”