4.  The applicant was born in 1967 and lived in Rostov-on-Don prior to his arrest. 5.  On 30 March 2006 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of murder. By judgment of 16 May 2006, the Orlovskiy District Court of the Rostov Region found him guilty and sentenced him to seven years’ imprisonment. On 18 July 2006 the Rostov Regional Court upheld the conviction. The applicant and his counsel lodged an application for supervisory review of the conviction. 6.  On 12 April 2007 the Presidium of the Regional Court, upon hearing the prosecutor, counsel for the applicant and for the injured party, quashed the conviction for formal defects and ordered a re-trial. The Presidium directed that the applicant should be held in custody, without citing grounds for the custodial measure or setting a time-limit for its application. 7.  On 26 June 2007 the District Court held a preliminary hearing and fixed the trial date for 3 July. By the same decision, the court determined that the applicant should remain in custody because he was charged with a particularly serious offence and could pervert the course of justice if released. The applicant and his counsel filed an appeal against the extension order. 8.  On 31 July 2007 the Regional Court examined the appeal in the absence of the applicant and his counsel. It annulled the detention order on the ground that the District Court had failed to set a time-limit for the applicant’s detention, in breach of the requirements of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It did not take any decision regarding the applicant’s further detention and referred the issue to the District Court for a new examination. 9.  On 7 September 2007 the District Court extended the applicant’s pre‑trial detention for a period of six months starting from 28 April 2007 and lasting until 28 October 2007, referring to the gravity of the charges and the applicant’s new line of defence which, in the District Court’s view, was an indication that he might abscond. On 8 October 2007 the Regional Court rejected in a summary fashion the appeal against the extension order. 10.  On 15 October 2007 the District Court extended the applicant’s detention until 28 December 2007, referring to the gravity of the charges and the flight risk. On 11 December 2007 the Regional Court upheld the detention order on appeal. 11.  On 13 December 2007 the District Court examined the applicant’s request for release. Noting that the trial was approaching the final stage, that the witnesses had been heard, and that the applicant had family and dependent children, the court held that the applicant could be released on bail. The applicant was released the following day. On 5 February 2008 the Regional Court quashed the bail decision, holding that the District Court had not taken proper account of the gravity of the charges. On 20 February 2008 the District Court reconsidered the matter and held that the applicant should be re-detained for a further three months on account of the gravity of the charges against him. On 26 March 2008 the Regional Court upheld the detention order on appeal. 12.  On 3 March 2008 the District Court found the applicant guilty of murder and sentenced him to five years’ imprisonment. On 23 April 2008 the Regional Court upheld the conviction.