Abstract: This article reviews most controversial issues pertaining to legal, organizational and actual possibility of using 3D video modeling in averment on criminal cases. The author analyzes the approach adopted in the US legal system towards application of video models of evidence in judicial proceedings, distinguishing between the main forms of 3D video models that exist in the US criminal procedure. Leaning on the analysis of particular judicial precedents and normative acts that regulate the questions of criminal proceedings in the United States, the author outlines the conditions (rules) for admissibility of 3D evidence. Applicable to the criminal procedure of the Russian Federation, the article formulates the legal framework for using video modeling in criminal proceedings, as well as gives a general description to the system of criminal procedural guarantees that ensure the rights of the individual in the context of using video modeling, and accuracy of information acquired from such evidence. The research employs the general philosophical method of materialistic dialectics, methods of analysis, synthesis, legal experiment, and comparative legal method. The scientific novelty consists in the fact that the author is one of the first to explore the question of using the results of video modeling in criminal proceedings in the Russian Federation. The analysis of the US law enforcement experience on the subject matter is of particular relevance due to accumulation of the vast practical experience in adapting video modeling technology to the needs of criminal justice of the XXI century. The doctrine of the national criminal procedure had not previously to determine the role of 3D video modeling in averment on criminal cases. The author's conclusions on the need to use the results of video modeling, including immersive reality, not only in expert activity, but also in criminal procedure (for example, in the course of hearing of arguments) are aimed at the transformation of criminal proceedings with regards to its optimization via digitalization.

Abstract: This article analyzes the conditions and legal ramifications of application of videoconference in various forms of criminal legal proceedings, highlighting practical issues emerging in arrangement of participation of parties in criminal proceedings via videoconference calls. As a product of digital technologies, videoconference is examined not only as a formal means of communication used by parties to a legal proceeding, but also as one of the means of exercising the right to a fair trial. The object of this research consists of communication and procedural relations arising between the parties to a legal proceeding with application videoconference. The subject of this research covers the entire complex of fairly recent norms for the Russian criminal procedural regulation governing application of videoconference on various stages of criminal proceedings on a case. The article contains practical recommendations by indicators that should be considered in determining optimal forms of participation in a criminal proceeding, as well as actions of parties that must be undertaken if during application of videoconference, the rights of the defendant are violated or the standards of fair trial are not being met. The article complies answers to the most topical questions on videoconference calls, taking into the consideration practical experience of the author, as well as relevant case law of the Russian courts and the European Court of Human Rights. The conclusion is made that application of videoconference is allowable in legal proceedings of the courts of first instance and courts of appeal in criminal cases heard in special order, cassation instance, supervisory instance, in execution of sentence, as well as within the framework of judicial control at pretrial stage in a criminal case, but only if procedural guarantees could be provided to all parties of the proceedings. In a trial by jury such technology is unacceptable.