Application for the Review appeal before the Supreme Court of 4 September 2023

Criminal review exists for exactly this: final convictions reached without knowledge of elements that surface afterwards. This brief activated that avenue.

The brief

• Filed on 4 September 2023 before the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court, by Apolozan's legal representation.
• Avenue: the prior authorisation of the extraordinary review appeal.
• Claim: the annulment of the convictions and the corresponding redress.

The new facts invoked, against Article 954 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Article 954 of the Criminal Procedure Act admits review when, after the judgment, knowledge arises of facts or items of evidence that evidence the innocence or the injustice of the conviction. What was provided:

• The forensic expert report of 19 July 2023 (A.33): subsequent to finality, impossible to provide earlier, and bearing on the integrity itself of the trial's record.
• Pages 35, 125 and 132-140 of the administrative file: the requirement of powers never complied with (A.4) and the validated technical valuations (A.10), whose absence of assessment in the case was documented.
• The complaint of documentary falsity and manipulation of evidence in the proceedings of origin.

The question the brief left served

If an expert report attesting the alteration of a trial's record does not constitute a new fact for the purposes of Article 954, the precept has no imaginable situation of application. The system's response appears in A.37 and A.38.

How to verify it

Read the requirements of Article 954 of the Criminal Procedure Act and, beside them, the inventory of what was provided: dates, contents, impossibility of prior provision. The fit requires no extensive interpretation — it requires reading.