This article is devoted to the impeachment procedure in the United States of America. The first part of the article outlines a short historical background on the subject. In the following part, the impeachment procedure is characterized in its current form, with particular emphasis placed on the role of the House of Representatives and Senate of the United States of America. The data concerning the processes that took place in the Senate as a result of the impeachment procedure are also indicated.

The article aims to draw attention to such an administrative procedure in which a citizen’s right to control administrative decisions issued by an administrative authority is guaranteed. This control is carried out mainly in the course of an instance examination of a case. The analysis of solutions in this respect against the background of constitutional guarantees will allow for the answer of whether legal solutions guarantee the right of an individual to hear an administrative case. The analysis of these solutions is based on the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Tribunal and administrative courts and the views contained in the literature.

This study investigates legal effects of appealing against a decision in part in the context of the constitutional principles of the protection of acquired rights, a two-stage procedure and the rule of law, which are determinants of standards of a democratic state ruled by law, and to formulate relevant conclusions. This is done by means of an analysis of the law in force and a comparative analysis, with a focus on the subject matter of the attribute and effects of a decision’s final force.

Mechanism of Appeal and Methods of Verification of the Expert Opinion in Criminal Proceedings

The article is devoted to the study mechanisms of appeal and methods of verification of the expert opinion in criminal proceedings. It is proved that the expert opinion, as well as other collected evidence, should be verified for its compliance with the requirements of the legislation and consistency with the case materials, and if violations are detected during its preparation, such an opinion should be subject to appeal. It is indicated that the methods of verifying the expert opinion are defined by articles 332 and 356 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine. However, the peculiarity of carrying out this verification of the expert opinion is that such verification is possible only at the stage of judicial proceedings, while the current Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine does not provide for a mechanism for verifying the expert opinion at the stage of pre-trial investigation. Attention is drawn to the fact that despite the absence of a legally defined mechanism for appealing an expert opinion in accordance with the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, a party to criminal proceedings is not deprived of the right to appeal against such an opinion in a different order, namely by submitting to the Central Expert Qualification Commission of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine an application for initiating disciplinary proceedings against an expert who violated the current legislation during the relevant expert examination. The grounds for submitting this application for initiation of disciplinary proceedings are: non-compliance of the expert’s specialty with the type of expert examination conducted by it; non-compliance of the content of questions put to the expert’s decision with the requirements of scientific and methodological recommendations; application by an expert of improper methodology of forensic examination; conducting expert research to clarify issues of law. It is argued that if, as a result of a review of the disciplinary responsibility of a forensic expert, it is found that he violates the norms of current law, then such an expert will be held disciplinarily liable, and the expert’s expert opinion drawn up by such an expert will be considered inadmissible evidence.