Abstract: The subject of the study was the legal norms contained both in Article 2.9 and in other norms of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation, which empower a law enforcement officer, when considering a case of an administrative offense in the field of traffic, to release a person from administrative responsibility if the administrative offense is insignificant.The object of the study was the administrative legal relations that arise when a law enforcement officer implements the legal institution of releasing a person from administrative responsibility if an administrative offense is insignificant.
The authors analyzed the positions of scientists who have studied this legal institution at various times. Special attention is paid to the decisions of the highest judicial authorities and judicial practice in this area by district and regional courts.
The article proposes criteria for determining an administrative offense as a gross one, and substantiates the position that a gross administrative offense cannot be recognized as insignificant under any circumstances. The methodological basis of the research was the dialectical method of cognition, the fundamental principles of the scientific worldview. In the course of the study, methods of historical, comparative legal, concrete sociological, and statistical analysis were used. When preparing a scientific article, the authors of the article conducted a survey of traffic police officers. As a result of the conducted research, the following conclusions were formulated:
1. The range of public relations in the field of public administration protected by legislation on administrative offenses is so wide that it makes it impossible to establish specific criteria for recognizing an administrative offense as insignificant.
2. In order to fill this gap, the higher judicial authorities establish specific compositions of administrative offenses that cannot be recognized as insignificant.
4. It is necessary to introduce the concept of "gross administrative offense" in the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, which should be understood as "administrative offenses, the repeated commission of which entails criminal liability."
5. Article 2.9 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation should be supplemented with the second part, which will contain the following legal norm: "Persons who have committed such administrative offenses, for which the repetition of their commission entails criminal liability, cannot be released from administrative responsibility in connection with the recognition of an act as insignificant."

Abstract: The object of the study is the public relations arising between a police officer and a person brought to administrative responsibility for committing an administrative offense provided for in part 1 of Article 20.20 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. The subject of the study was the legal norms contained in Part 1 of Article 20.20 of the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation. The proposed article analyzes the composition of an administrative offense provided for in part 1 of Article 20.20. of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses and law enforcement practice in cases of this category.
The purpose of the work was to formulate, based on the analysis of theoretical provisions and law enforcement practice, proposals and recommendations for improving police activities in the qualification of an administrative offense provided for in part 1 of Article 20.20 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.