A copy of the trace as a criminal procedure form of derivative evidence

The article considers the issues of differentiation of the criminal procedure terms “trace”, “imprint” and “impression”. The possibility of using the term “technical and forensic copy of materially fixed trace-image” in the criminal procedure law of Russia is analyzed. Implementation of the mentioned category in the language of criminalistics and content of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation will clarify understanding of various types of derivative evidence in terms of their existence as a copy and impression of the trace. A proposal is made to specify paragraph 8 of Article 166 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation “Investigation report”, which should be supplemented by the term “technical and forensic copy of the materially fixed trace-image”. The evidentiary primacy of the impression of the trace-forming object and the evidentiary secondary nature of the copy of this impression (materially fixed trace-image) are determined. It is concluded that without such legislative clarification in the practice of application of the rules of criminal procedure in Russia, different approaches to the interpretation of the considered derivative evidence may arise.