What is multicrime? What forms does it take, as well as the significance for bringing the perpetrator to justice. This article reveals the main provisions of this concept.
The direct term "plurality" is not used in criminal law, but its forms are disclosed by articles 17-18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In accordance with the norms specified in the article, the plurality of crimes is defined as cases of consecutive commission of crimes by the perpetrator (at least two acts), as well as cases of commission of criminal acts during the period when restrictions on already committed crimes are in force earlier. At the same time, the crimes committed can be of a homogeneous type or completely different from each other in terms of signs and composition. Characteristic features for the multiplicity of crimes are:
- commission by one person of at least two independent acts that entail criminal liability;
- acts may be completed or incomplete, as well as committed by another accomplice in the crime or directly by the perpetrator;
- the absence of a procedural obstacle to bringing the perpetrator to justice for at least two of the acts committed;
- the existence of a reflection of these crimes in the guilty verdict of the court or in the main procedural documents.
Forms of multiplicity of crimes
Directly in the theory of criminal law there is big number forms of multiplicity of crimes - this is repetition, repetition, totality, relapse, criminal activity, criminal fishing and others. However, the current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation gives reason to believe that it contains only four main types of multiplicity of crimes: 1. The totality of crimes- one of the main forms of multiplicity of crimes. In accordance with Part 1 of Article 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, this is a case of two or more crimes committed by one person, for none of which the perpetrator was convicted. In addition, a set of crimes is recognized as one action or inaction of the perpetrator, which contains signs of a crime provided for by at least two articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The range of crimes is divided into:
- real, when each of the crimes is a completed act, one of them seems to be preparation for another more serious one (for example, theft of weapons for terrorist act);
- ideal, when the totality is defined as one action that contains the signs of a crime provided for by at least two articles of the Code, and it does not matter whether these acts are provided for by different articles of the Criminal Code or by one article (for example, the actions of a guilty person who does not have the appropriate education and who performed an abortion on several women at the same time and in the same place, will be qualified under part 1 of article 123 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for each victim separately, for the totality of crimes).
Important! The totality of crimes is recognized as an aggravating circumstance of criminal liability. It should be noted that the real population, as a rule, is more socially dangerous than the ideal one.
2. Commitment of two or more criminal acts which are provided for in the articles of the Code as a circumstance that entails a more severe punishment. This type multiplicity of crimes is not the main one, it was introduced into the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation federal law No. 73-FZ of July 21, 2004 “On Amendments to the Criminal Code Russian Federation". The form provides for the declaration of a single criminal act of at least two crimes that are not related to each other in any way, except that they are committed by one person.
3. Recidivism- Another basic form of multiplicity of crimes. In accordance with Part 1 of Art. 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, recidivism is the commission of an intentional criminal act by a person who already has a criminal record for a crime committed earlier.
Important! Such a form of multiplicity of crimes as recidivism, as a rule, carries with it an increase in criminal liability.
Recidivism is divided into:
- general - when a person commits heterogeneous crimes;
- special - when a person commits the same or similar crimes;
- penitentiary - when a person commits crimes in places of deprivation of liberty.
However, the most important qualification is the division of recurrence according to the degree of danger, there are:
- dangerous relapses - when a person has committed a serious crime, if earlier this person was sentenced to imprisonment for at least two intentional crimes moderate or for a grave or especially grave crime;
- especially dangerous relapses - when a person has committed a serious crime, if earlier this person was sentenced to imprisonment for at least two intentional serious crimes or when a particularly serious crime was committed by a person, if earlier this person was sentenced to imprisonment for at least two intentional serious crimes crime or convicted of a particularly serious crime.
It is also worth noting that Part 4 of Art. 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes the types of convictions that are not taken into account when recognizing recidivism, these are:
- criminal convictions small gravity;
- convictions for crimes committed by minors;
- conditional convictions for crimes or convictions for which there is a suspension of the execution of a court sentence, provided that the sentence was not canceled due to the appointment of a new appointment in the form of real imprisonment to the guilty person;
- convictions that are extinguished or withdrawn in accordance with Article 86 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Important! When recidivism is recognized, convictions related to convictions of a person in other countries, including in the CIS countries, as well as convictions for crimes against life that were committed under extenuating circumstances (Article 106-107, part 2 of Article 108) are not taken into account. Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
4. Aggregate sentences- Very complex shape plurality of crimes, which is not actually recognized as such in the theory of criminal law, since long years identified with relapse. However, the totality of the sentence has a broader concept than the recidivism of the crime and can be, both combined with this form of plurality of the criminal act, and not combined, just in those matters when we are talking on convictions that are not taken into account when recidivism is recognized. The imposition of punishment on the basis of the totality of sentences is regulated by the norms of Article 70 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
The distinction between a single crime and a plurality of acts
Usually, the distinction between such concepts as a single crime and a plurality of crimes does not cause any difficulties, since the qualification of a single crime fully covers the signs of one composition, provided for by one article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. A single crime is an act or omission, infringes on only one object and is committed with one form of guilt. However, in criminal law there is such a thing as a complex single crime, it is outwardly similar to a plurality of crimes, since it consists of a number of homogeneous or heterogeneous actions and is a continuing or ongoing crime. A complex single act is a crime based on an alternative / repetition of actions, for example, illegal acquisition, storage, transportation, manufacture, processing of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances or their analogues. The commission by a person of each of these actions is already sufficient grounds for recognizing the crime as completed, but at the same time, the implementation of all actions together will be regarded as a single ongoing crime, without the formation of a plurality. Generally criminal law identifies the following several types of a complex single crime: continuing, lasting, compound, with two mandatory actions, with several alternatives, with two forms of guilt, with repeatedly committed actions, multi-objective, with additional severe consequences.
When resolving the issue of defining a crime as a single or multiple one, one should proceed from the norms of a separate article of the Code and identify the socio-psychological content of criminal behavior.
Issues related to the quantitative side criminal activity, - the most controversial and difficult questions criminal law science and law enforcement practice. At the same time, the quantitative side of crimes, as follows from the fundamental laws of philosophy (the transition of quantitative changes into qualitative ones), is closely related to the qualitative side of illegal acts.
At the intersection of these two most important features any manifestation material world, and including the crime, apparently, and it is possible to determine the degree of intensity or the nature of the public danger of the committed illegal act.
One of the authors of the textbook of the General Part of Criminal Law Yu.A. Krasikov characterizes the multiplicity of crimes as cases when one or several successively committed acts of the perpetrator contain signs of several crimes.
Although this definition On the whole, it correctly reveals the content of the analyzed concept, but it does not seem to be quite concretized. As you can see, it does not reflect the essential features by which the multiplicity of crimes is distinguished from other related concepts.
Obviously, this definition should not only indicate cases when the same person commits several illegal acts for which he is criminally responsible, but also contain a certain bridge for those cases when the same person committed a new crime after being convicted for a previous act. .
In this regard, the characterization presented by other authors is more accurate. Unlike a single (single) crime, the multiplicity of crimes is characterized by the following features:
- a person commits by one act (inaction) or several acts two or more crimes falling under the same article of the criminal law (or different articles), for none of which he was convicted;
- commits any crime after conviction for a previous one that retains criminal consequences.
With the noted interpretation of the concept under study, it is very clearly seen that it is formed not only by cases of a person committing several dissimilar crimes, but also identical ones, as well as both before bringing the perpetrator to criminal liability and after conviction for the previous act. TO strong side This position also includes the fact that an attempt is being made, and moreover, a successful one, to draw a border line with a single (single) crime. The main stumbling block in understanding the essence of the institution under consideration was the fact that many definitions did not take into account cases when, with the formal presence of signs of plurality, from the point of view of the law, no additional consequences occurred for the perpetrator.
The multiplicity of crimes can be seen as social aspect as well as in legal. From a legal point of view, the plurality of crimes should be characterized as a criminal law concept that reflects certain forms of crime that entail appropriate legal consequences.
It is quite obvious that in the legal understanding, the fact of plurality is absent if at least one of the two committed criminal acts has expired the statute of limitations for criminal liability, or the statute of limitations for the execution of a guilty verdict has expired, or the conviction has been canceled or expunged, or there is an act of amnesty or pardon, repaying its legal consequences, and also there was an exemption from criminal liability in accordance with the law or there are procedural obstacles to the initiation of criminal prosecution.
Based on the foregoing, as the most preferable, the following definition of the multiplicity of crimes should be taken as a basis. The plurality of crimes should include such entailing legal implications cases when a person commits several crimes simultaneously or consecutively before being brought to criminal responsibility or commits a crime again after being convicted for the previous one, if at the same time, at least two of the committed criminal acts have not been canceled (not removed, have not expired) criminal legal consequences, and there are also no procedural obstacles to initiating a criminal case.
Analyzing the problems of multiplicity, it should be noted that any such criminal activity contains elements of a single (single) crime. It becomes obvious that in order to correctly limit the cases of multiple criminal acts from its antipode of a single crime, it is necessary to analyze the social and legal essence of a single crime. The core of most criminal acts is a system or set of human actions (sometimes very complex), which differ significantly from one another in external data. At the same time, according to their objective features, such actions may coincide with the features of various elements of crimes. This explains why many criminal acts involve constituent elements such unlawful socially dangerous actions that, when legally assessed in isolation and without taking into account the subjective orientation, could be considered as independent criminal acts provided for by various articles of the Criminal Code. However, in the structure of the corresponding criminal act, these actions do not have an independent legal value, are not subject to a separate legal assessment, but are absorbed within the framework of this crime.
According to its objective features, a single crime is characterized very differently, which, in turn, is due to its differentiation by type. However, the most typical cases are characterized quite simply: in the form of a single action that entailed a single consequence. In the theory of criminal law, such acts are called simple crimes. In practice, in most cases this happens, but it happens, although much less often, when, for example, one action entails two or more negative consequences. Under the condition of a single form of guilt, such actions and the resulting harmful consequences also relate to a single crime, although in their own way outward signs they bear a strong resemblance to some varieties of multiplicity of criminal acts.
In the legal literature, such acts are classified as complex single crimes and, as a rule, are divided into three types: compound, continuing and ongoing crimes.
Composite means such crimes that consist of two or more criminal acts, each of which, if considered in isolation, constitutes an independent simple crime.
As rightly noted by A.M. Yakovlev, in a number of cases, the legislator combines into one offense the acts already defined in other articles of the Criminal Code as independent crimes. The number of integral single crimes includes, for example, robbery, consisting of violence against a person and taking possession of other people's property. Thus, compound crimes are, in essence, a special case of a set of crimes taken into account by the rule of law. In other words, a compound crime is characterized by the combination by law into a single crime of heterogeneous actions, leading to heterogeneous consequences, again within the framework of a single form of guilt. Among the complex compound crimes, one should also include such acts based on alternative actions. These include, for example, the acquisition or sale of property obtained by criminal means (Article 175 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The peculiarity of alternative compound criminal acts lies in the fact that the implementation of each of the actions indicated in the disposition of the criminal law norm is in itself sufficient to recognize the crime as committed. At the same time, a person does not commit a new crime if he consistently carries out all the actions named in the disposition of the article of the Criminal Code, for example, first acquires, and then sells the same property after a certain time.
The complex also includes the so-called continuing crimes, the peculiarity of which is that they are committed continuously for a more or less long period of time. Such crimes include, for example, evasion of customs payments (Article 194 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); non-return to the territory of the Russian Federation of objects of artistic, historical and archaeological heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation and foreign countries (Article 190 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); malicious evasion of repayment of accounts payable (Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), etc.
And, finally, the continued crime belongs to the third variety of single complex crimes. The originality of continued crimes is manifested in the fact that such acts are made up of a number of identical criminal actions aimed at common purpose and constituting in their totality a single crime. Distinctive feature of such acts is that they are committed not continuously, but by actions renewed in time, each of which does not have the character of an independent crime, but represents a link, a stage of continuation, implementation of the same criminal act. Separate acts of a continued crime, as long as they do not have the nature of an independent crime, do not receive independent qualification, but in their totality are considered as a single crime.
It should be noted that in the unlawful acts related to the unity, there is a subjective criterion of such unity without fail. This criterion is the presence of a single form of guilt, in fact, uniting homogeneous actions and consequences. In other words, in order to recognize a crime as a single (single) one, it is important that such a crime be committed within the framework of any one form of guilt (intent or negligence), since otherwise it will no longer be a single crime, but a combination of them. It should also be noted that in the structure of the corresponding crime, a certain set of actions performed does not have independent legal significance, is not subject to a separate legal assessment and, as a result, is absorbed within the framework of this crime.
Aggregate of crimes
According to the current criminal legislation, the totality of crimes has a legislative basis (Article 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Within the meaning of the noted definition, this kind of plurality is defined as the commission of two or more different crimes containing signs, respectively different formulations provided for by various articles or parts of articles of the Criminal Code, under none of which the subject was convicted. As follows from the above definition, the perpetrator, in the presence of signs of a combination of crimes, is criminally liable for each crime committed under the relevant article or part of the article separately. The presence in criminal law of the concept of a set of crimes is explained by the fact that the legislator cannot foresee certain combinations of repetition of crimes and, therefore, cannot determine their degree of public danger, which means that he is not always able to determine the type and limits of criminal punishment for a particular combination. many criminal acts. Obviously, this explains the fact that, under Russian criminal law, the punishment for the totality of crimes is determined taking into account the penalties imposed for each individual crime included in this totality.
The peculiarity of this variety of multiplicity of crimes is that the subject of the commission of a crime can realize his intent to commit a set of crimes both within the framework of one action (inaction) and as a result of a number of such actions. The main thing that unites both of these cases: in the first and second cases, two or more different crimes are committed.
In special legal literature, it is customary to call such forms of a set of crimes a real and ideal set. Although the legislator does not directly name these types of cumulative crimes, however, he says that one action (inaction) containing signs of crimes provided for by two or more articles of the Criminal Code (part 2 of article 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) is also recognized as a cumulative crime. In other words, the current compiler of the Criminal Code, as it was before the adoption of the Fundamentals of Criminal Legislation in 1958, again returns to the differentiation of the totality of crimes into real and ideal.
The real totality of crimes is understood as cases when a person, by various independent actions, commits two or more crimes provided for by various articles of the Criminal Code, for none of which he was convicted. An obligatory sign of a real aggregate, as well as other types of multiplicity, is the presence of a person committing two or more criminal acts. However, this type of aggregate is characterized by the commission of crimes most often at different times. As studies by many authors show, the real population is more common than the ideal. For the considered type of aggregate of crimes, it is also characteristic that in this case the crimes are committed by actions that are different in design and execution, and therefore can and should be considered as a form of repetition of crimes. At the same time, the sign of the time difference in the commission of criminal acts can sometimes be expressed indistinctly. In other words, the criminal acts included in this set, although they may coincide in time, but one of the crimes must necessarily be started before the other. For example, a certain Mikheev, without proper permission, carried "nunchucks" related to edged weapons with him. Drinking alcohol in company with Borisov, due to a dispute that arose, Mikheev deliberately caused moderate harm to his health with this weapon. As you can see, although here there is a coincidence in time of both illegal acts, however, there is a real set of crimes under Art. 112 and 222 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, if the totality formed by the crimes provided for by various articles, as a rule, is not in doubt, then the qualification of the crimes provided for different parts Articles of the Criminal Code, in theory and in practice, at one time caused heated discussions. Even at the legislative level, one could observe fundamental differences in approaches to assessing the totality of crimes. For example, if at one time the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1960 did not provide for the formation of a set of crimes by different parts of the article, then, on the contrary, the Criminal Code of the Georgian SSR took this position.
The noted situation could not but cause lively discussions among lawyers and, accordingly, do not affect the diversity of points of view on the merits of this issue. For example, I.S. Tishkevich and A.F. Zelinsky. In substantiation of their objections, the authors noted that qualification on the basis of the totality of crimes affecting different parts of the same article allegedly inevitably leads to a double qualification of the deed, which, in turn, inevitably leads to an unjustified increase in the amount of punishment imposed by the court. Other authors, on the contrary, spoke in favor of the need to attribute to the totality of crimes the acts provided for by different parts of one article. In their opinion, even if the perpetrator of different time commits, although homogeneous criminal acts, but differing in essential features, all the same, none of the parts of the relevant article of the Criminal Code can cover the deed as a whole. The qualification of the deed in such cases under the article, even providing for liability for a more serious case of this crime, does not reflect the fact that a person committed a criminal act several times and under various circumstances. The reasons for the noted disagreement arose due to an underestimation of the fact that the basis of criminal liability is not the commission of a crime, as established by Art. 3 of the Criminal Code of 1960, and the corpus delicti . One crime, the author explains, most often has several compositions, and each composition fits into the disposition of the criminal law norm with its own sanction. For example, Art. 105 provides for one crime - murder and two offenses - simple (part 1 of article 105) and qualified (part 2 of article 105). If the subject first committed a simple element of murder, for example, a murder out of jealousy, and then killed a witness in order to hide the first murder, he performed two elements of the crime, which are provided for respectively by two parts of Art. 105. There is a combination of simple (part 1 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and qualified (clause "k" of part 2 of article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) elements of murder. The current Criminal Code of the Russian Federation resolves the issue unambiguously: the totality where two different crimes are committed, including those provided for by different parts of the article. Certain questions are also raised by qualification on the grounds of a real set of crimes, consisting of different combinations completed and unfinished torts. For example, from a completed crime and preparation, or consisting only of unfinished torts. The same applies to cases of crimes committed in a group with a different distribution of roles.
A definite result in generalization theoretical research and accumulated practical experience on the noted issue was the Decree of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the USSR of July 31, 1981 “On the practice of sentencing when committing several crimes and for several sentences”. It was explained that the statutory rules for sentencing for cumulative crimes apply “also in cases where a person commits similar actions, some of which are qualified as a completed crime, and others as preparation, attempt or complicity in a crime.” Thus, the deed must be qualified according to the rules of the real aggregate, if the components of this institution are unfinished crimes or crimes committed in complicity. At the same time, apparently, one should not forget that criminal liability comes only for preparation for a serious crime (Part 2, Article 30 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Summarizing the above, we can conclude that the real set of crimes, being a form of a plurality of crimes, differs in that it may include various combinations of crimes that are not singled out by the legislator as recidivism.
Another type of set of crimes, where signs of two or more criminal acts are clearly manifested, but committed by one action (inaction), is called ideal in theory and practice. As a retrospective study of this issue shows, indications of the ideal set were contained in the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1922 (Articles 29, 30), as well as in Art. 33 Fundamental Principles of the Criminal Legislation of the USSR and the Union Republics of 1924. This well-established idea of the legal nature of the ideal set of crimes is also the result of lengthy discussions and empirical research by researchers. As an illustration of the spectrum of the most different opinions one can imagine, for example, the position of N.F. Kuznetsova, who believed that the totality would be ideal if "with one action, the subject causes two different damages, respectively, to different objects." However, such arguments were rightly disputed by other scientists, since damage as a result of one action can be simultaneously inflicted on various objects and at the same time covered by only one criminal law norm. Accordingly, an ideal set is not formed in such cases. Other points of view can also be found. With an ideal totality, there is one crime that contains signs of various elements of crimes, and the purpose of the institution of the ideal totality is to fill the gap of the legislator, who failed to provide for all possible combinations in the criminal law when committing various attacks. Other authors proposed to consider as an ideal set such cases in which only one crime occurs, but it can be mentally divided into several criminal acts. Today it can be stated that in the end the position of those authors who believed that the totality is characterized by the fact that none of the norms does not fully cover the deed has won. An act can receive a correct legal assessment only through the application of both (or several) norms of the Special Part taken together.
Considering the ideal set of crimes, one cannot but pay attention to the peculiarity of the manifestation of the subjective side of the composition. This feature is expressed in the guilty person's conscious consideration of the possibility of achieving several results through one action, and, consequently, the implementation of the tasks set for himself.
In such cases, it is legitimate to assume that a person performs two volitional acts with one action, and in this case the subject of the crime shows the same mental attitude to all criminal results. The entire expected set of results is not only taken into account in the mind of the guilty person, but is also desirable for him. At the same time, in practice, the guilty person's subjective assessment of the expected results, as a rule, is unequal. Most often, some results are only expected, others are desired. However, in this case, the multiplicity of crimes is not eliminated, since there are only variations in the forms of guilt. On the contrary, in the absence of guilt in relation to any of the socially dangerous results (for example, in the presence of an incident), an ideal set is not observed.
The totality of crimes is also absent in cases where one crime is a means of committing another, more serious one. For example, damage to health as a method of murder, forgery as a method of deception in fraud, beatings in hooliganism. There is no set of crimes in the above examples.
Thus, in the case of a combination of crimes, the perpetrator, as required by the law (Article 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), bears criminal liability for each unlawful act committed by him. And the corresponding definition (Article 69 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), in the presence of signs of a combination of crimes, regulates the rules for sentencing. Each of the crimes must be qualified according to an independent article or part of it, and for each of the acts, its own punishment must be assigned.
Recidivism of crimes
Another important problem of qualification is the question of which of the persons involved in criminal activity organized group or community, should be attributed to its participants (members)? It seems that the peculiarity of the criminal activity under study lies in the fact that the personal contribution of accomplices of an organized criminal formation has a limited value. He can play a primary role only in sentencing. This conclusion is based on a direct indication of the law. For example, in an organized stable group character changes in a certain way. causation between the actions of each of the participants and the ensuing consequences. Thus, the actions of accomplices become associated with consequences not only through the actions of the performer. Obviously, all the activity of the organized group as a whole is the cause of the consequences. This could justify the qualification of the actions of all members of an organized criminal group without reference to Art. 33 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the issue of distinguishing between instigators and accomplices from members of an organized criminal group performing secondary functions presents a certain difficulty. In addition, there is an opinion that it is very problematic to bring to justice persons who are actually members of such criminal communities, but who did not participate in the crimes committed by the group either as perpetrators or as other traditional accomplices.
It seems necessary to distinguish all persons who are the object of qualification into three subgroups:
The first subgroup includes persons who directly carried out the criminal act described by the legislator in the dispositions of the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code, Art. Art. 158 - 162 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, i.e. performers, organizers of the act and persons who performed minor roles in the same act;
The second subgroup - persons who are not direct perpetrators of a criminal act, but who took part in the realization of the purpose of criminal activity (the organizers of the group, persons who performed secondary roles in criminal activity (for example, protective, economic and financial, etc.);
The third subgroup - persons who took part in the implementation of the objective side of the crime (instigators and accomplices).
As the analysis of this classification shows, not all accomplices in criminal activity are directly related to the criminal result. Therefore, based on the principle of social justice, their role should be strictly differentiated. Such a task, according to the authors, could be solved using the term "criminal activity". Firstly, thanks to this term, it becomes possible to draw a line between members of an organized criminal group (members of the group) and their accomplices or instigators; secondly, it becomes possible to separate accomplices and instigators from persons who performed secondary roles in a criminal act; thirdly, by introducing the term “criminal activity”, the problem of bringing to justice persons who indirectly performed the objective side of the crime is solved: the organizer of the group, persons who performed the protective and economic and financial functions of the criminal formation. It seems that the fact of the existence of a group (already in itself) acts as necessary condition criminal activity and achievement of results of this activity. And in this sense, the very existence of the group is the cause of the onset of social dangerous consequences, since its existence is directly related to the implementation of criminal activities. That is why the activity of individuals, aimed solely at maintaining the functioning of the group, ensuring its "safe" activity, is in a causal relationship with all the results of the group's activities. This is obvious and serves as an objective prerequisite for the responsibility of all members of the group.
Thus, at the screening stage and during the investigation, criminal activity should be considered in inseparable connection, including all the facts of this criminal activity known to law enforcement agencies, as well as the roles and functions of individual members of such groups performed in it. This will allow not only to objectively study the nature of criminal activity, but also to effectively use the entire arsenal of available criminal law means. However, practical significance use of the term "criminal activity" can only be fully implemented with legislative application this concept in the norms regulating both the issues of the institution of plurality (Chapter 3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), and the issues of complicity (Chapter 7 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), sentencing (Chapter 10 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), etc.
The criminal legislation of the Russian Federation contains criminal law nomes that establish the features of the application of criminal liability for the commission of not one, but several crimes. This, in turn, requires a clear distinction between the concepts of a single crime and a plurality.
Under single crime is understood as the commission of a socially dangerous act by committing one or more similar actions (inaction), infringing on one main object (legal relationship protected by criminal law), having a single goal, covered by a single intent and provided for in one specific article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Single crimes can be with simple and complex compositions. At simple composition the perpetrator encroaches intentionally or through negligence on one main object, while performing one action (inaction) and causing one specific damage. For example, fraud (Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). For single crimes complex composition include compound crimes, crimes with two or more acts, continuing and ongoing crimes.
The specificity of single complex crimes with two or more actions is that the commission of any of the various actions specified in the law forms one crime. Even the commission of all these actions constitutes only one crime. For example, illegal acquisition, storage, transportation, manufacture, processing without the purpose of sale of narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances or their analogues in large size(part 1 of article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
Continuing single crime characterized by an act of a person, associated with the subsequent long-term performance of a prohibited action or failure to fulfill certain duties assigned to him under the threat of criminal prosecution. An example of such a crime is the illegal possession of weapons, ammunition, explosives and explosive devices (Article 222 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), malicious evasion of repayment of accounts payable (Article 177 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The specificity of a continuing crime is that it continues continuously for a long period of time until the perpetrator stops committing the act or is held accountable. Moreover, the legislator does not set a time period. It can be within a few minutes and for several years. This has no bearing on the onset of criminal liability and is not determinant in sentencing.
Unlike the lasting ongoing crime forms an act consisting of a number of identical criminal actions covered by a single goal and directed at one main object of criminal encroachment. For example, torture (Article 117 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) occurs when the perpetrator systematically inflicts beatings on the same person.
Continuing crime starts from the moment of the first criminal act and ends with the last one. Despite the commission by a person of several separate, albeit identical, actions, it is considered as a single crime. For example, in order to steal wheels, the perpetrator removes one wheel each time from a car left unattended and takes them to his garage. If he is detained with the next wheel, the deed does not constitute a repetition of theft, since his actions are directed towards one object, have a single goal and are covered by a single intent.
Composite is a crime consisting of two or more independent crimes forming a single crime, the responsibility for which is provided for by a separate article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Compound crimes are aimed at two or more independent objects, but in their totality they characterize a single crime. Such crimes, as a rule, have several objects of criminal encroachment, one of which is singled out as the main one, and the rest act as additional ones.
For example, the use of violence that is dangerous to the life or health of the victim, associated with the taking or an attempt to take possession of his property, forms one crime - robbery (Article 162 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). An example of a compound crime would be riots. Mass riots cover crimes committed in the course of riots: destruction or damage to property (Article 167 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), robbery (Article 161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), infliction of harm to health, including serious (Articles 111, 112, 115 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), the use of violence against a representative of the authorities (Article 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), etc. The commission of the listed crimes during riots is generally covered by the signs of mass riots under Art. 212 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Often, compound crimes are fixed by signs of only a qualified corpus delicti. These include the following crimes: illegal abortion, which negligently caused the death of the victim (part 3 of article 123 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); unlawful deprivation of liberty associated with the use of violence dangerous to life or health (part 2 of article 127 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), etc. A compound crime must be distinguished from an ideal set of crimes as a form of plurality.
Under crimes with multiple alternative actions a complex act is understood, the objective side of which includes several socially dangerous actions, the performance of any of which forms a complete composition, qualified under the article on such a crime. The qualification of a crime does not change when a person performs not one, but two or all of the alternatively envisaged actions. If a person acquires, stores, transports and sells firearms, liability for him comes under Art. 222 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Under the same article, it is necessary to qualify actions when they are limited only to the acquisition of firearms. The difference in the volume of criminal activity is not reflected in qualifications, but must be taken into account when sentencing. Such a complex act must be distinguished from repetition and totality as forms of plurality.
A crime with two mandatory acts is a complex act, the objective side of which consists of two necessary action. The absence of one of the two mandatory actions, depending on the circumstances of the case, either means the commission of a crime at the stage of only an attempt, or indicates the absence of grounds for criminal liability. Such crimes include rape, extortion, kidnapping, etc.
Two-object and multi-object crimes characterized by the fact that the encroachment is carried out on two or more direct objects. Sometimes two- or multi-objective crimes can coincide with compound crimes, for example, piracy is both a compound and multi-objective crime (objects are public safety, property relations, health, personal life). However, two-objective and multi-objective crimes can have completely independent values. Examples of such a two-objective crime are obstruction of the lawful entrepreneurial activity committed by an official (Article 169 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the main object is relations for the normal conduct of business activities, an additional object is the normal activity of bodies state power, local government); acquisition or sale of property knowingly obtained by criminal means (Article 175 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the main object is relations in the field of economic activity related to the commission of transactions, an additional object is the normal activity of the justice authorities in the field of detection, investigation and judicial trial socially dangerous act), etc.
Crimes with two forms of guilt encroachments are called in which, as a result of an intentional crime, grave consequences are inflicted that are not covered by the intent of the perpetrator, and the attitude towards which is expressed in negligence in the form of frivolity or negligence (Article 27 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). In accordance with the meaning of the law, such a complex crime can only be a crime with a material qualified composition. The crimes with two forms of guilt include intentional infliction grievous harm health, negligently resulting in the death of the victim (part 4 of article 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); terrorism, negligently resulting in the death of a person (part 3 of article 205 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), etc. The above-mentioned crimes are at the same time compound.
In contrast to a single crime, characterized by the commission by a person of one act, which qualifies under one article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation or part of it, multiplicity of crimes constitutes the commission by a person of two or more independent acts, which are qualified under various articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, it is necessary that each of them be an independent single crime, that is, each committed act taken separately is characterized by the unity of its objective and subjective features containing a specific crime.
Crimes that form a plurality are committed by one subject. It does not matter whether he commits all the crimes alone or in complicity. A crime can be either completed or committed only at the stage of an unfinished act in the form of preparation or attempt.
Plurality is formed by at least two crimes. On this basis, the multiplicity of crimes differs from the competition of criminal law, in which there is one crime.
Plurality is formed by crimes if at least two of them retain their legal significance. This sign means: for none of the two crimes, the statute of limitations for criminal liability has expired (Article 78 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); the person was not exempted from criminal liability for any of the crimes in connection with active repentance (Article 75), reconciliation with the victim (Article 76), due to a change in the situation (Article 77), with the application of compulsory educational measures to the minor (Article 90), with amnesty (Article 84) or on the basis of 18 special types of exemption provided for in the notes to the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (notes to Articles 126, 198, 204, 205, 206, 208, 222, 223, 228, 275, 291, 307, 337, 338).
The legislation of the Russian Federation establishes several forms of plurality: the totality of crimes, recidivism of crimes. The Federal Law of the Russian Federation “On the Introduction of Amendments and Additions to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation” dated December 8, 2003 No. 162-FZ excluded the repetition of crimes from the number of plurality. Thus, the legislator provided the courts with the opportunity to determine the perpetrators of a more just punishment in accordance with the severity of the crimes committed and the real harm caused by them.
A set of crimes is the commission of two or more crimes, for none of which a person has been convicted. In the case of a combination of crimes, a person is criminally liable for each crime committed under the relevant article or part of an article of the Criminal Code (part 1, article 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The committed in the aggregate always involves the commission by a person of two different independent crimes that are subject to separate qualifications. At the same time, the aggregate takes place not only when a person commits two or more acts, each of which is an independent crime (real aggregate), but also in cases where the perpetrator, committing one act provided for as an independent crime, at the same time commits and another independent crime (ideal set). For example, in order to commit a robbery, a person illegally acquires firearms. In this situation, his actions will be qualified as illegal acquisition of weapons (Article 222 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) and preparation for robbery (part 1 of Article 30 and paragraph “d” of Part 2 of Article 162 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
If the crime is provided for by general and special norms, there is no set of crimes and criminal liability occurs according to a special norm (part 3 of article 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). For example, a person committed theft by stealing drugs. In this case, criminal liability will only come under Art. 229 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (theft or extortion of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances) without applying Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (theft).
Crimes that form a set can be heterogeneous, homogeneous, identical. Depending on the time, there are 2 types of aggregates.
Real Population- this is the commission by one person of two or more crimes of different times, within the statute of limitations, one of which necessarily precedes the other.
The real population usually qualifies under several articles, each qualifies independently. But if in a short period of time, as a result, the direction of intent has changed, the less serious is redistributed into a more serious homogeneous one, then only one article is provided for the most serious.
Ideal set- cases when one act commits two or more homogeneous or heterogeneous crimes. This population is always qualified under several articles.
In a real population, the statute of limitations for prosecution begins to run when each crime is completed. With an ideal combination, the terms begin to flow immediately simultaneously, but independently. With a real aggregate, each crime is described separately. With an ideal set of descriptions of all crimes, qualification at the end for each crime separately. The real totality is an obstacle to the application of Art. 70 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The ideal totality does not preclude the application of Art. 75, 76 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which provide grounds for exemption from criminal liability.
For cumulative crimes, there are two forms of limiting maximum penalties:
1. The final punishment for the totality of crimes may not exceed 25 years.
2. The final punishment may not exceed by more than 1/2 the maximum amount of punishment under the sanction of the article for the most serious crime in the aggregate.
The totality of crimes, especially the ideal one, should be distinguished from a composite single crime. In the aggregate, the crimes committed are not fully covered by the signs of one corpus delicti provided for by one article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Such a situation requires the qualification of the deed under two or more articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the norms of which only in this combination cover all the signs of the crimes committed. For example, the perpetrator unlawfully deprived the victim of freedom, while causing serious harm to his health. In the deed, there is an ideal set of crimes enshrined in paragraph “c” of Part 2 of Art. 127 and part 1 of Art. 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, since unlawful deprivation of liberty, combined with the use of violence dangerous to life or health, does not cover the composition of the intentional infliction of grievous bodily harm to a person.
A difficult issue is the difference between the ideal set of crimes and the competition of criminal law norms. Competing norms means that one crime has been committed, the signs of which are established in two or more criminal law norms, of which only one norm must be applied. In an ideal combination, two or more crimes are committed by one action, provided for by two or more criminal law norms. It is necessary to qualify crimes committed by one action under two or more different articles or parts of the same article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In case of competition of criminal law norms, to qualify publicly dangerous act it is necessary according to the article that contains the norm that describes the signs of such an act in the most detailed and complete way.
Recidivism of crimes according to Art. 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation recognizes the commission of an intentional crime by a person who has a criminal record for a previously committed intentional crime. It should be noted that the new criminal legislation rejects the concept of a “especially dangerous recidivist”, as it was in the old Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. This is due primarily to the fact that in Art. 2 of the Declaration of the Rights and Freedoms of Man and Citizen proclaims: "All are equal before the law and the courts." This is also enshrined in Art. 19 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Recognition of a person as a “especially dangerous recidivist” under the old Criminal Code entailed increased criminal liability and maximum punishment for various intentional crimes. This contradicts the basic principles of the criminal law, so the legislator in the new Criminal Code of the Russian Federation refused to individualize recidivism, but, nevertheless, left this concept for general use.
The recurrence of crimes as a legal consequence entails the appointment of a guilty person with a more severe punishment within the limits of one or another article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, in Art. 68 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes a special procedure for sentencing in case of recidivism of crimes.
A mandatory sign of recidivism is the presence of a guilty person at the time of the commission of a new intentional crime, a conviction for the past, also an intentional crime. At the same time, when recidivism of crimes is recognized (in accordance with the amendments and additions introduced by the Federal Law of the Russian Federation of December 8, 2003), the following are not taken into account:
a) convictions for intentional crimes of minor gravity;
b) a conviction for crimes committed by a person under the age of 18;
c) convictions for crimes, the conviction for which was recognized as conditional or for which a deferment of the execution of the sentence was granted, if the conditional conviction or the deferment of the execution of the sentence was not canceled and the person was not sent to serve the sentence in places of deprivation of liberty, as well as convictions expunged or canceled in accordance with the law okay.
The recognition of the recidivism of crimes by the criminal law is connected, first of all, with the social danger of persons already convicted of intentional crimes, but, nevertheless, again committing intentional crimes. The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for increased criminal liability for such persons.
The new Criminal Code of the Russian Federation provides for three types of recidivism: simple, dangerous and especially dangerous.
Simple relapse the commission of an intentional crime is recognized by a person who has a criminal record for a previously committed intentional crime (part 1 of article 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
Recidivism is recognized dangerous when a person commits a serious crime for which he is sentenced to real imprisonment, if earlier this person was twice convicted for an intentional crime of medium gravity to imprisonment, as well as when a person commits an intentional serious crime, if he was previously convicted of a serious or especially serious crime to real imprisonment (part 2 of article 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
especially dangerous recidivism is recognized when a person commits a serious crime, for which he is sentenced to real imprisonment, if earlier this person was convicted twice for a serious crime to real imprisonment. Also, recidivism is recognized as especially dangerous when a person commits an especially serious crime, if he has previously been convicted twice for a serious crime or an especially serious crime (part 3 of article 18 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
According to another classification of recidivism (according to the nature of the crimes committed), general and special recidivism are distinguished.
General called recidivism in the commission of heterogeneous crimes. An example would be committing libel after being convicted of vandalism.
Special recidivism form homogeneous and identical crimes. In the cases provided for by the Criminal Code, a special recidivism is a qualifying or especially qualifying sign of the corpus delicti. For example, illegal traffic precious metals, natural precious stones or pearls, committed by a person previously convicted of illegal trafficking in precious metals, natural precious stones or pearls (Article 191 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), etc.
So, relapse has the following legal consequences:
1) recognition of recidivism as a qualifying sign of a crime;
2) recognition of recidivism as an aggravating circumstance;
3) mandatory toughening of sentencing (Part 2, Article 68 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation); 4) designation of a certain type of place of deprivation of liberty.
