The article is devoted to research the actual procedural grounds for appellate review of court decisions in criminal proceedings of Ukraine. As a result of the study of these criteria for appellate review of court decisions, the authors concluded that the domestic legislator rightly singles out such grounds, as they cover violations related to evidence in criminal proceedings. The legal nature of the incompleteness of the trial and the inconsistency of the court’s conclusions with the actual circumstances of the criminal proceedings are given. Emphasis is placed on the fact that the incompleteness of the trial covers violations related to the shortcomings of criminal procedure in the collection and verification of evidence. Instead, the inconsistency of the court’s conclusions with the actual circumstances of the criminal proceedings concerns judicial errors in the assessment of evidence and improper motivation of court decisions. The manifestations of these factual procedural grounds for appellate review of court decisions are analyzed. The procedural consequences of establishing signs of incompleteness of the trial and inconsistency of the court’s conclusions with the actual circumstances of the criminal proceedings are singled out. Analyzing the relevant norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, the Criminal Procedure Code of other states, as well as the views of researchers, the authors present their vision of the issues included in the subject of research. The necessity of improving the criminal procedure legislation of Ukraine, which regulates the incompleteness of the trial and the inconsistency of the court’s conclusions with the actual circumstances of the criminal proceedings, is substantiated.