Public danger of crimes relapse

2020 ◽  
pp. 111-121
Author(s):  
Sergey Kartashov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Public ◽  
Special Part ◽  
Principle Of Justice ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
First Time

We point out that the danger is not the relapse of the crime, but the identity of the criminal, since the punishment for the person who committed the crime for the first time and the criminal who committed the crime again must be different, otherwise it would be contrary to the provision of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation “Principle of justice”, which requires taking into account the degree of committed socially dangerous crime and the identity of the perpetrator. It is reflected that since 2012 there has been a revival of “special relapse” in some corpus delicti (Articles 131, 264.1, etc.). In addition, we clarify that, in a certain sense, relapse can also include corpus delicti with administrative prejudice, but their reflection in the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation contradicts the concept of crime (Article 14 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), but directly on administrative prejudice in the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation domestic legislator did not mention anything. We note that in the current legislation it is necessary to return to the use of the term “relapsed criminal”, since it is precisely the number and categories of crimes that indicate the public danger of the identity of the perpetrator. We also denote that the relapse of crimes does not increase the degree of public danger of a particular crime, but testifies to the public danger of the identity of the perpetrator committing a certain act prohibited by criminal law.

scholarly journals The impact of administrative prejudice upon the content of penal prohibition

2021 ◽  
pp. 99-115
Author(s):  
Sergei Gennadevich Losev ◽  
Viktor Ivanovich Morozov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Record ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Subject ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Impact

The object of this research is the legal relations arising in the context of implementation of the norms of criminal law of the Russian Federation that establish liability for repeated administrative offenses. The subject of this research is the practice of application the criminal law norms of the Soviet and post-Soviet periods that regulate the institution of administrative prejudice, and acts of interpretation of the Russian Constitution, in which the Supreme Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation deals with the problems of the use of separate articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation that contain the norms with administrative prejudice, and parts of interrelation between the institutions of administrative prejudice and recurrence of offenses. The subject of this research is also justification of existence the institution of administrative prejudice in the national criminal law, main flaws in interpretation of the articles that describe the norms of the institution of administrative prejudice in the text of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Taking into consideration all shortcomings in interpretation of the articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the author offers unified definition of the composition with administrative prejudice. It is suggested to reintroduce the concept of recurrent offense in the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, taking into account the fact of administrative liability, outstanding criminal record, or criminal record that has not been expunged. The case if the legislator deems it necessary to take into account not identical, but homogeneous recurrence should be stipulated in the note to the article of the Special Part. The author also offers to include the Article 16.1 into the General Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the following wording: “The repeated offense is considered an act committed by a person who has previously been subjected to administrative penalty for similar type of offense, unless stipulated otherwise in the corresponding articles of the Special Part of the effective Code”.

On the System of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
pp. 31-40
Author(s):  
Elena Shchelkonogova
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Law System ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation

The article raises the problem of systematic interpretation of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, since fair enforcement of criminal law articles is impossible without understanding their sense intended by the legislator. One of the effective methods for identifying it is systematic interpretation of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code. They are considered as elements of the system, their logical relations with each other and with the articles of the General Part of the Criminal Code are identified. Systematic consideration of the Special Part of the Criminal Code induction and deduction allowed formulating its current definition based on the fundamental difference between the rule of law and the article of the law. Identification of the systemic features of the Special Part helps distinguishing it from structure and classification. The article also pays attention to the problem of determining the various grounds for division of legislative material of the Special Part; the meaning of such concepts as «criminal legislation system» and «criminal law system» is delimited. The question is raised whether it is correct to speak about the system of crimes enshrined in the Special Part of the Criminal Code.

CODIFICATION PROBLEMS OF NECESSARY DEFENSE AFFECTING ITS IMPLEMENTATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 155-163
Author(s):  
PETRUSHENKOV ALEXANDR ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Educational Institutions ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Teaching Staff ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Legislative Activities

Objectives. The goal of scholarly research is to develop proposals for amendments in criminal law General and Special part of Criminal code of the Russian Federation governing self-defense. The scientific article identifies legislative gaps and contradictions that hinder the effective implementation of the necessary defense and require prompt solutions. Methods. The article analyzes such concepts as “self-defense”, “public assault”, “excess of limits of necessary defense”, “violation of the conditions of lawfulness of necessary defense”, “surprise assault”, “rights defending or other persons, interests of the state”. The use of logical and comparative legal methods allowed us to develop proposals for making changes to the criminal law norms that establish the necessary defense. Conclusions. The article shows the conflicts and gaps legislative recognition of self-defense and, in this regard, the complexity of its implementation in the articles of the Special part of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation and practical application. Changes are proposed to the criminal law norms regulating the necessary defense, both in the General and in the Special part of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation. Sense. The content of the scientific article can be used by the teaching staff of higher educational institutions when teaching the course “Criminal law”. The results of the work can be useful to persons who carry out legislative activities in the field of criminal law. The leitmotif of the article can be used in the preparation of dissertation research.

scholarly journals AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES CHARACTERIZING SUBJECTIVE SIGNS OF CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (5) ◽  
pp. 681-685
Author(s):  
V.I. Tikhonov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Legislation ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Subjective Side

The Institute of mitigating and aggravating circumstances is presented not only in the norms of the General part of the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The application of these circumstances in the construction of individual elements of a crime allows the legislator to differentiate the orientation of the criminal law influence in relation to a specific crime element or in qualifying the fact of life reality. In law enforcement practice, proving the subjective side of a crime often causes significant problems. At the same time, motivation and achievement of a specific goal of committing a crime can have both a mitigating and an aggravating effect. The subjective side has a significant impact not only on the design of the offenses of the Special Part of the Criminal Law, but also on the process of sentencing through legal regulation of circumstances mitigating or aggravating criminal punishment. In this regard, both general and mandatory features of the subject of the crime also affect the procedure for establishing guilt and determining punishment in accordance with the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Of scientific interest is the study of the influence of the process of legal regulation of mitigating and aggravating circumstances in terms of the impact on this process of subjective signs of criminal behavior.

SYSTEM OF THE GENERAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODEOF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

2020 ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
E. V. Shchelkonogova
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Historical Aspect ◽  
Meaningful Relationship ◽  
Special Part ◽  
General Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article examines the General part of the Criminal Code. It is considered from the point of view of a systematic approach, questions are raised about the meaningful relationship between the norms of the General Part and the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The historical aspect of the formation of the current structure of the Code is given, and the question of whether the General and Special parts of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are identical parts or not. The sections of the General Part are analyzed in order to identify their functional load and significance for law enforcement.

Individualization of Punishment Taking into Account the Nature and Degree of Public Danger

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (11) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Вячеслав Воронин ◽  
Vyacheslav Voronin
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Practice ◽  
The Public ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
Common Criteria ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Common

Part 3 of article 60 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation refers to the common criteria of individualization of punishment the nature and degree of public danger of committed crime in each criminal case. The purpose of this article is to analyze the legal practice of this provision, as well as the construction of clarification on the issue of taking into consideration the public danger, which will be useful for the judiciary. For this purpose the author supposes to solve following problems: analysis of dogmatic ideas about the nature and degree of public danger; search for factors that courts consider in determining public danger in judicial practice; analysis of the survey data of judges from different regions of the country. As a result the author concludes that the nature of public danger depends on the object of the offense and cannot influence on individualization of punishment, because it was considered by the legislator when constructing the corresponding article of the Special Part and therefore should be excluded from Part 3 of art. 60 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Degree of public danger when individualizing is determined subject to the objective and subjective elements of a crime. The author proposed to make recommendations on considering into account degree of public danger in the judgment 22.12.2015 No. 58 adopted by the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation “On practice of criminal sentencing by courts of the Russian Federation”.

scholarly journals ON THE LEGISLATIVE CONSTRUCTION OF TERRORIST CRIMES IN THE SPECIAL PART OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION (ON THE EXAMPLE OF ARTICLES 205–205.6 OF THE CRIMINAL CODE OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION)

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 46-52
Author(s):  
D. V. Golenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article discusses current trends characteristic of the Russian criminal law and the practice of its application in the fi eld of combating terrorism. The acts provided for in Chapter 24 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Articles 205205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) are analyzed in detail from the point of view of the location of the legislative material, as well as the structures of the elements of the crimes. Special attention is paid to the structure of Articles 205205.6 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (dispositions, sanctions, notes). The types of structures of terrorist crimes at the time of completion are considered. The article analyzes the current practice of applying this Articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as well as offi cially published judicial statistics. The study allowed us to identify existing contradictions within the criminal law and formulate some recommendations for improving legislation in the field of combating terrorism.

scholarly journals DETERMINATION OF THE TIME OF CONTENTS UNDER DEFENSE IN THE TERM OF PURCHASED PUNISHMENT DEPENDING ON THE CONDITIONS OF INSULATION. CRITICAL THINKING OF CHANGES IN THE CRIMINAL LAW

2019 ◽  
pp. 37-39
Author(s):  
A.A. Zhiksembaev ◽  
Z.I. Sagitdinova
Keyword(s):  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Systematic Approach ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The Other ◽  
Principle Of Justice ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The One

The paper presents the author's assessment of the latest novels of the criminal law in the field of offsetting the time of detention in the term of the sentence imposed. The attention is drawn to the incompatibility of several provisions of the Article 72 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation with the principle of justice, that is a consequence of the lack of a systematic approach to amending and supplementing the criminal law. On the one hand, the article 72 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in the new edition improved the situation of convicted persons, but on the other hand, the recent changes and additions put a number of convicts in an unequal position.

THE HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF LEGISLATION ON LIABILITY FOR FRAUD IN RUSSIA

2021 ◽  
pp. 12-20
Author(s):  
Andrey V. Arkhipov ◽  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Russian Empire ◽  
Soviet Period ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Russian Empire ◽  
First Time

The article examines the history of the emergence and development of Russian legislation on criminal liability for fraud. It is noted that for the first time fraud is mentioned in the legal acts of the second half of the 16th century - the Codes of Justice of Tsars Ivan IV and Fyodor Ioannovich. Initially, fraud was most often understood as a deft but petty theft, in which de-ception was used to facilitate its commission. The understanding of fraud as the theft of other people's property, committed by deception, began to be formed only in the second half of the 18th century with the publication on April 3, 1781 by Empress Catherine II of the Decree "On the court and punishments for theft of different kinds and the establishment of working houses in all the gubernias." In the 19th century, the clarifying process of the content of the term "fraud" continued. It was reflected in the first codified criminal laws of the Russian Empire - Code of crimi-nal and corrective penalties of Russia of 1845 and the Charter on Punishments imposed by the justices of the peace of 1864. A significant contribution to the development of the Russian criminal law on liability for fraud was made by a group of legal scholars involved in the de-velopment of the Criminal Code of the Russian Empire, in which the whole Chapter 33 (Arti-cles 591-598) contained the rules on liability for fraud. Although the 1903 Criminal Code was not fully enacted, it had a significant impact on the formation of criminal law on liability for fraud in subsequent regulations. During the Soviet period, the legislation on the responsibility for fraud continued to develop. For the first time, abuse of trust was mentioned as a method of crime, along with deception. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the adoption in 1993 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Federal Law 10 of 01.07.1994 made signifi-cant changes to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation of 1960 that served as the basis for the system of crimes against property in modern Russia.

Influence of the ideas of Ivan Yakovlevich Foynitsky on the formation of criminal responsibility for kidnapping in modern Russia

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (12-3) ◽  
pp. 230-234
Author(s):  
Natalia Martynenko ◽  
Anatoly Maydykov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Modern Concept ◽  
Russian Scientist ◽  
Special Part ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article analyzes the ideas of the Russian scientist in the field of criminal law Ivan Yakovlevich Foinitsky (1847-1913) on the establishment of criminal liability for kidnapping. The influence of I.Y. Foinitsky's ideas on the modern concept of criminal law protection of a person from abduction is shown. It is concluded that the norm on responsibility for the abduction of a person existing in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, its location in the structure of the norms of the Special Part, in many respects includes the provisions laid down by I.Y Foinitsky.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document