scholarly journals Criminal liability for destruction or damage forest plantations: qualification questions

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 202-206
Author(s):  
Y A Timoshenko

The article deals with issues arising in the classification of acts, responsibility for which is provided Art. 260 and Art. 261 of the Criminal Code. Based on the analysis of judicial practice, as well as the views expressed in the scientific literature, it is concluded that the discrepancies in the interpretation of criminal prohibitions on the destruction and damage of forest plantations, due to the imperfection of the legislative structures Articles 260 and 261 of the Criminal Code, which became possible due to non-compliance with the rules of legislative technique

2020 ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva

The implementation of criminal liability for an unfinished crime, interrupted at the stage of preparation, is not consistent with the basic criminal law requirements, since the act committed at the stage of preparation, clearly does not contain any signs of a crime or its composition. At the same time, the imposition of punishment is carried out in accordance with the sanction of the norms of the Special part of the criminal code, which indicates the existence of an act not actually committed by the convicted person. This allows us to raise questions about the legality and necessity of bringing a person to criminal responsibility for an act recognized as preparation for the Commission of an intentional crime. The analysis of provisions of the current criminal legislation, sources of scientific literature, and also materials of judicial practice on criminal cases about incrimination of preparatory actions, allowed to draw a conclusion according to which attraction of the person to responsibility for Commission of the act characterized as preparation for Commission of crime, contradicts the principle of legality and justice. In this regard, it is proposed to change the current criminal legislation, eliminating the rules on the preparation of the Institute of unfinished crime.


2021 ◽  
Vol 225 (2) ◽  
pp. 46-51
Author(s):  
K.A. SHILOV ◽  

Abstract. The article analyzes the scientific literature, judicial practice on the specific characteristics of qualifying an insult to an employee of the FPS of Russia as a representative of the authorities. Proposals and additions to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are formulated. Key words: qualifications, criminal liability, insult, employee of the FPS of Russia, a sign of publicity, the objective side of the insult.


2020 ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva

The implementation of criminal liability for an unfinished crime, interrupted at the stage of preparation, is not consistent with the basic criminal law requirements, since the act committed at the stage of preparation, clearly does not contain any signs of a crime or its composition. At the same time, the imposition of punishment is carried out in accordance with the sanction of the norms of the Special part of the criminal code, which indicates the existence of an act not actually committed by the convicted person. This allows us to raise questions about the legality and necessity of bringing a person to criminal responsibility for an act recognized as preparation for the Commission of an intentional crime. The analysis of provisions of the current criminal legislation, sources of scientific literature, and also materials of judicial practice on criminal cases about incrimination of preparatory actions, allowed to draw a conclusion according to which attraction of the person to responsibility for Commission of the act characterized as preparation for Commission of crime, contradicts the principle of legality and justice. In this regard, it is proposed to change the current criminal legislation, eliminating the rules on the preparation of the Institute of unfinished crime.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-45
Author(s):  
V. F. Lapshin ◽  
E. H. Nadiseva

The implementation of criminal liability for an unfinished crime, interrupted at the stage of preparation, is not consistent with the basic criminal law requirements, since the act committed at the stage of preparation, clearly does not contain any signs of a crime or its composition. At the same time, the imposition of punishment is carried out in accordance with the sanction of the norms of the Special part of the criminal code, which indicates the existence of an act not actually committed by the convicted person. This allows us to raise questions about the legality and necessity of bringing a person to criminal responsibility for an act recognized as preparation for the Commission of an intentional crime. The analysis of provisions of the current criminal legislation, sources of scientific literature, and also materials of judicial practice on criminal cases about incrimination of preparatory actions, allowed to draw a conclusion according to which attraction of the person to responsibility for Commission of the act characterized as preparation for Commission of crime, contradicts the principle of legality and justice. In this regard, it is proposed to change the current criminal legislation, eliminating the rules on the preparation of the Institute of unfinished crime.


Author(s):  
Alexander V. Shesler ◽  
◽  

The article examines criminal acts, with which the law associates certain criminal legal consequences. The aim of the article is to substantiate the identification of various criminal acts and show their specificity in comparison with crimes. The research is based on the domestic criminal legislation, materials of judicial practice and the legislation of the Federal Republic of Germany. The research methods are: the method of comparative law, which allowed comparing the provisions about criminal offenses in the 1960 Criminal Code of the RSFSR and in the 1996 Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Code of Germany; the method of document analysis, which made it possible to analyze the judicial practice and proposals of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the introduction of provisions on criminal offences in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; the formal-logical method that made it possible to analyze the content of the norms of the Criminal Code about criminal acts. The article concludes that, in addition to crimes, criminal acts should include: a criminal offence, which entails criminal liability in the form of replacing punishment with a more severe one (fine, compulsory labor, correctional labor, restriction of freedom as the main type of punishment, forced labor) or criminal liability in the form of the cancellation of any type of probation (suspended sentence, parole, deferred sentence, deferred sentence for drug addicts); a minor act; socially dangerous behavior of persons who are not subjects of a crime due to their minor age or insanity; innocent infliction of harm. The article shows the specificity of a misdemeanour, consisting in the fact that this act is not socially dangerous, does not contain signs of a crime, violates the liability of the convicted person to be subject to limitations arising from the court-appointed punishment or type of probation (suspended sentence, parole, deferred sentence, deferred sentence for drug addicts). It is substantiated that a minor act should be referred to circumstances that exclude the criminality of an act due to the absence of public danger, an essential feature of a crime. It is argued that acts, provided for by the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, committed in a state of insanity and entailing compulsory medical measures, should not be subject to criminal law. The article criticizes the judicial practice of a broad interpretation of the commission of a crime by a group of persons, according to which it is not only a co-execution, but also any execution of the objective side of the crime by several persons, of which only one can be the perpetrator. It is argued that causing harm due to the non-compliance of the psychophysiological qualities of a person with the requirements of an extreme situation does not apply to innocent infliction of harm.


2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-106
Author(s):  
V.V. Kusakin ◽  

The article is devoted to the analysis of Article 350 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for criminal liability for violation of the rules of driving or operating cars, the evolution of this article and the problems of sentencing under it are considered. One of the suggestions for improving this article is to change its sanction, which will eliminate the identified significant legal gap. The author conducted a comprehensive analysis of various aspects related to the criminal violation of traffic safety rules and the operation of military vehicles, and proposed the author's solution to the problematic aspects. The study used specific dialectical methods: comparative, hermeneutical, discursive, formal-legal, as well as some sociological methods: observation, methods of expert assessments and analysis. The provisions contained in the materials of the article can be used to improve the current criminal legislation and to develop explanations of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in reviews of judicial practice.


Author(s):  
Viktor Borkov

The article discusses the urgent, not regulated by the criminal law, problem of qualifying the actions of the person who committed the crime as a result of the provocative actions of law enforcement officials. Attention is drawn to the absence in theory and judicial practice of a consistent scientific and legal justification for the release of persons provoked to a crime from criminal liability. An “encroachment” committed as a result of a “police provocation” is considered taking into account the institutions of complicity, involvement and inducement to commit a crime. The author examines the proposals already made by experts from fixing the provocation of a crime as one of the circumstances excluding criminal liability (Chapter 8 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), to including its arsenal of operationalsearch means to combat crime. According to the constitutional legal understanding of the investigated problem, the assessment of the act of the provoked is influenced by the activities of the persons who incited him to commit a crime, the essence of the disturbed social relations and the nature of the physical, property, organizational or other consequences that have occurred. The question of the criminal legal assessment of the acts of the provoked persons is proposed to be decided differentially, taking into account the reality and the measure of the harm caused by them.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 79-84
Author(s):  
N. N. Korotkikh

The article analyzes some of the controversial, in the opinion of the author, recommendations of the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation No. 10 of 15.05.2018 «On the practice of the courts applying the provisions of paragraph 6 Article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation». Lowering the category of crime always requires clear criteria by which the actions of the defendant could be qualified with a change in the gravity of the crime. Based on examples from judicial practice, the thesis is substantiated that “taking into account the factual circumstances of the case” and “the degree of its public danger” are evaluative e criteria and do not always allow to decide the validity of the application of part 6 article 15 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The discrepancy between some of the recommendations contained in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is shown. It is concluded that it is impossible to exempt a person from criminal liability on the grounds specified in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.


2020 ◽  
pp. 19-25
Author(s):  
Г. О. Гончарук

The article is devoted to the definition of the subject-matter of such corruption crimes as a proposal, a promise or the provision of an undue benefit (stipulated in Article 369 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine). The normative legal acts, forensic scientific literature, and also the analysis of judicial practice are studied. It is ascertained that to the subjects of the proposal, the promise or the provision of undue benefits, that is, the crimes provided for in Art. 369 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine can be classified as: a) cash, b) benefits, c) benefits d) services, e) intangible assets, f) other property. Taking into account the following forming properties, it is expedient to subdivide the objects of the offer or the promise of improper benefit to the official for real and symbolic. In accordance with the analysis of judicial practice, the average subject-matter of a proposal, promise or provision of improper benefit to an official is cash in local currency (UAH) in the amount of UAH 6286.70.


Author(s):  
S.A. Styazhkina

The article discusses the issues of criminal liability for encroachments on the procedure of official document circulation. The concept and features of a document and an official document as subjects of criminal law protection are analyzed in detail. Criteria are proposed for distinguishing between a document and an official document, as well as the classification of documents. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of amendments to Article 327 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, made in the summer of 2019, which provide for responsibility for the falsification, production or circulation of fake documents, state awards, stamps, seals or letterheads. The article examines in detail the objective features of the elements of crimes encroaching on official documents, which include the acquisition, sale, stealing, destruction, damage, concealment, as well as forgery of official documents, the sale of fake official documents and their use. The issues of the subjective side of these crimes are considered. The article also focuses on the problems of delimiting the use of obviously fake official documents, the responsibility for which is provided for in paragraph 4 of Article 327 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation from crimes, where the use of fake documents acts as a means of committing a crime, such as fraud, illegal obtaining a loan, etc. Suggestions are made on the appropriateness amending a number of articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, providing for liability for encroachment on official documents.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document