Set of crimes. Lawyer's comment

MIP online legal encyclopedia - » Criminal cases - comments of the Federal Judge / MIP Law Group » General provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - comments of the Federal Judge / MIP Law Group » Set of crimes. Lawyer's comment

Sign up for a consultation with the head of the criminal department. Professional explanations. Unlimited consultation time

Set of crimes - free answers from lawyers online

The commission of one crime often pushes the offender onto an illegal path, coupled with the commission of acts that pose a public danger. Under the definition of “set of crimes,” the legislator defined the commission by a person of at least two crimes for which such a subject was not punished.

The rules providing for the imposition of punishment for a set of crimes are determined by the General Part of the Criminal Code. Such punishment should be a way to achieve the main goal of criminal law, which is to adequately assess acts, apply measures of influence to violators of the law and prevent such actions in the future.

The concept of a set of crimes

The provisions defined in Art. 17 of the Criminal Code, give the concept of the totality of crimes committed. This sign is understood as the commission by one subject of two or more crimes, for which this person was not convicted.

An exception to the general rule are cases when such a commission is, according to the norms of the Special Part of the Criminal Code, a circumstance entailing punishment characterized by the greatest severity.

As a set of crimes, one act can be recognized, the composition of which contains elements of crimes established in several criminal norms.

The concept and characteristics of a set of crimes belong to the evaluation category. The most important signs are:

presence of at least two criminal acts;
absence of signs of another in one crime;
the presence of legal consequences of each of the acts;
no criminal record for these acts.

In order for law enforcement and judicial authorities to recognize a set of crimes, the acts by a person must be committed simultaneously or in a certain sequence. This circumstance indicates the presence of behavioral habits of the subject of the crime, his awareness of impunity, to which the state must express an appropriate reaction, manifested in the measure of punishment.

A set of crimes can be formed by both identical or homogeneous acts, and those that do not have such characteristics.

The law has established a rule according to which only the presence of crimes that are classified under various articles of the Criminal Code can be recognized as a totality.

Essential for the qualification of acts is the possibility of criminal prosecution for several crimes simultaneously. This means that the statute of limitations should not expire for both acts, the acts continue to constitute a crime, and the subject of their commission has not been amnestied for their commission.

It is impossible to recognize as a totality the commission of a single act by a person, which is enshrined in both general and special norms at the same time. In this case, we are talking about the possibility of applying liability measures in one of the two proposed types.

Multiplicity of crimes

Definition 1
Multiplicity of crimes is the commission of more than two crimes by one person. Plurality indicates a high degree of social danger of the person who committed the crime and the gravity of the act itself.

Signs characteristic of multiple crimes:

all crimes are committed by one subject (or the person who committed the crime is the organizer, instigator, accomplice or executor);
in the behavior of the person who committed the crime, there is a plurality in the form of a set of crimes;
there are at least two crimes committed;
the crimes committed retain criminal and legal significance;
there are grounds for criminal prosecution in relation to at least two crimes (the statute of limitations for criminal liability has not expired (Article 78), the person has not been released from criminal liability as a result of repentance (Article 75), etc.).

Are you an expert in this subject area? We invite you to become the author of the Directory Working Conditions

Meaning of multiplicity of crimes:

the commission of several crimes by one person indicates a significant social danger of the person who committed the crime, which caused harm to a wide range of people;
the identity of the criminal indicates the person’s propensity to commit a crime;
the commission of several crimes by one person has a negative impact on all members of society, as it creates the illusion of lawlessness and impunity;
the plurality of crimes is taken into account when making a court decision and when assigning punishment;
the presence of multiple crimes affects the decision on release from criminal liability.

A person involved in multiple crimes encroaches on different groups of social relations, as a rule, leading to more serious consequences than one crime, all other things being equal. The fact of committing a plurality of crimes provides for the individualization of the responsibility of the person who committed the criminal act, the correct qualification of the act, and the delimitation of a single crime from other crimes.

Finished works on a similar topic

Course work Types of multiple crimes in criminal law 480 ₽ Abstract Types of multiple crimes in criminal law 240 ₽ Test work Types of multiple crimes in criminal law 210 ₽

Receive completed work or specialist advice on your educational project Find out the cost

Types of crimes

The industry theory reveals two types that characterize the totality of crimes. The real type of aggregate is understood as the fact of the commission of several acts that are independent crimes. A prerequisite for recognition of the totality is the absence of a criminal record for them.

Practice shows that criminal acts, most often, are not committed simultaneously, although when committing ongoing acts, they may have this sign. The inevitability of punishment and criminal procedural deadlines make the time between crimes quite short.

The main features of the ideal type of aggregate are quite similar to the real one. Both types are combined by the presence of two or more crimes provided for in various articles of the Criminal Code.

To recognize a set as ideal, it is characterized by the presence of one action, which can be qualified by two articles at once.

Commentary to Art. 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

According to Art. 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, a totality of crimes is recognized as the commission of two or more crimes provided for by various articles or parts of an article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, for none of which the person was convicted, except for cases where the commission of two or more crimes is provided for by the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as a circumstance entailing a more severe punishment (Part 1), as well as one action (inaction) containing signs of crimes provided for by two or more articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (Part 2).

In case of aggregation of crimes, a person bears criminal liability for each crime committed under the relevant article or part of an article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

These provisions are intended to ensure the principle of fairness in the application of criminal law, according to which punishment and other measures of a criminal legal nature applied to a person who has committed a crime must correspond, in particular, to the nature and degree of public danger of the crime (Part 1 of Article 6 Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Ensuring such compliance in cases where harm was caused to several groups of social relations protected by criminal law is achieved, among other things, by qualifying the act and imposing punishment for the totality of crimes.

A different decision could lead to the fact that in the event of harm being caused simultaneously to several objects, the entirety of which is not protected by one or another specific norm of the criminal law, the harm caused to some of these objects would not receive the necessary legal assessment, and the interests of the victims in such would be unprotected in this case.

The definition of the concept of a set of crimes given in Art. 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, allows us to highlight its characteristic features.

The first is the commission of two or more independent crimes by a person. The independence of crimes is evidenced by such circumstances as their different objective side, the absence of a single intent to commit homogeneous actions, and different objects of encroachment. These circumstances make it possible to distinguish a set of crimes from single complex crimes.

In this case, the crimes that form the aggregate can be heterogeneous (provided for by different articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, for example, committing theft and murder) or homogeneous (provided for by the same article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, for example, committing several thefts).

The commission of one act by a person, characterized by several elements of a crime provided for by various parts or paragraphs of one part of one article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, does not form a set of crimes. Thus, committing theft with illegal entry into a home (clause “a”, part 3, article 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), on an especially large scale (clause “b”, part 4, article 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) does not form a set of crimes.

In addition, the crimes included in the aggregate may vary depending on the stage of the crime.

The commission of two or more crimes does not form a combination in cases where their commission is provided for by the articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation as a circumstance entailing a more severe punishment. Thus, the infliction of grievous bodily harm (Article 111 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), which entailed the death of the victim by negligence, does not form a set of crimes, although causing death by negligence is provided for in an independent article. 109 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In this case, causing death by negligence is a circumstance entailing a more severe punishment, which excludes the presence of a combination of crimes.

However, in some cases, establishing such a circumstance causes certain difficulties. In particular, paragraph “h” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes liability for murder associated with robbery, extortion or banditry. In this regard, the question arose about the existence of a set of crimes, since an indication in the law of the connection between murder and robbery can be regarded as an indication of a circumstance entailing a more severe punishment. With this approach to assessing an act, murder associated, for example, with robbery, should be classified as a single crime.

This question was answered in paragraph 11 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of January 27, 1999 N 1 “On judicial practice in cases of murder (Article 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation)”, which states that as associated with robbery , extortion or banditry should be classified as murder in the process of committing these crimes. What was done in such cases is qualified under paragraph “h” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in conjunction with articles of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation providing for liability for robbery, extortion or banditry.

At the same time, it should be noted that sometimes the position of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the issue of the presence or absence of a set of crimes in certain cases is subject to changes. Thus, in paragraph 5 of the said Resolution, it was proposed to qualify the murder of two or more persons, if the actions of the perpetrator were covered by a single intent and were committed, as a rule, simultaneously, under paragraph “a” of Part 2 of Art. 105 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, i.e. as a single crime. If there was intent at different times, the murder of two or more persons should be classified as a combination of crimes. In accordance with the current version of the resolution, it is proposed to qualify the murder of two or more persons as a single crime, regardless of the presence or absence of a single intent.

The next mandatory feature of a set of crimes is the absence of conviction for the crimes included in the set. In this case, the fact of conviction will take place from the moment the verdict is announced. This position follows from the provision enshrined in paragraph 36 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of January 11, 2007 No. 2 “On the practice of imposing criminal punishment by the courts of the Russian Federation,” which states that “when a person commits a new crime after the pronouncement of a sentence for the previous crime, courts should proceed from the fact that, since the passing of a sentence ends with its public proclamation, the rules for imposing punishment based on the totality of sentences (Article 70 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) also apply in the case when, at the time the convicted person committed a new crime, the first sentence had not entered into legal force.” .

In this regard, only those crimes for which a person has not been convicted can form a set, i.e. no conviction has been made against him.

A set of crimes can form crimes committed by one or different actions, both at different times and simultaneously. In this regard, two types of aggregate crimes are distinguished: real and ideal aggregate.

The real totality of crimes is the commission by the perpetrator of several actions, usually two or more crimes at different times.

The length of time separating the crimes is irrelevant to the existence of a real population. It can be significant or small. For example, in a murder committed in the process of robbery, both crimes are carried out almost simultaneously, but form a set of crimes, since they are committed by different actions. The time of commission of two or more crimes may completely coincide. Thus, the simultaneous illegal possession of weapons and drugs forms a real set of crimes, since at the time of the commission of one ongoing crime, another is committed, and both crimes continue to be committed until the state of storage ceases. The presence of a real aggregate in this case is due to the fact that outwardly almost identical storage actions are still different, since they are performed independently in relation to each item of storage.

Thus, the distinctive feature of a real set of crimes is the commission of several crimes by different actions. The same position is taken by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which in paragraph 8 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 27, 2007 N 51 “On judicial practice in cases of fraud, misappropriation and embezzlement”, in particular, o.

———————————

Bulletin of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. 2008. N 2.

Unlike the real one, the ideal set of crimes represents the commission by a person of one action (inaction) containing signs of crimes provided for by two or more articles of the criminal law.

In this case, a person commits an action (inaction) that entails several different consequences, causing damage to various objects protected by different articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, objects that are or may be harmed should not be correlated with each other as particular and general. In such situations, the actions of a person constitute a totality of crimes, since none of the norms separately covers the entire act.

For example, a perpetrator, in order to influence decision-making by authorities, commits an explosion in a residential building, as a result of which the residents die and the structure is destroyed. If there is a deliberate attitude towards the consequences, his actions are subject to qualification under Art. Art. 205, 105, 167 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In fact, with one action (explosion), the person committed three crimes: an act of terrorism, murder and intentional destruction of property. But the subjective side of the crimes included in the totality (both real and ideal) may be different. The law does not establish any restrictions in this regard. Thus, when a residential building is set on fire with the aim of destroying it, the attitude towards the death of the owner who died in the fire can be either intentional or careless, which, naturally, will affect the qualifications of the act.

Part 3 of Art. 17 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes a general rule stating that if a crime is provided for by general and special norms, there is no totality of crimes and criminal liability arises according to the special norm. In this situation, we are not talking about a set of crimes, but about competition between norms. Thus, receiving a bribe (Article 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation) presupposes abuse of official powers (Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). However, receiving a bribe does not form a set of crimes and does not require additional qualifications under Art. 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, since this norm is general in relation to Art. 290 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

In some cases, the issue of the presence or absence of a set of crimes is resolved taking into account the sanctions of the relevant articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. This approach, for example, is widespread in relation to assaults committed with the use of physical violence. We are talking about what volume of physical violence is covered without additional qualification by the corresponding element of a specific crime, and when additional qualification is required under articles on crimes against life, health and physical freedom.

In practice, the main way to solve this problem is to compare the severity of specific sanctions, since the nature of the social danger of the crime, the degree of importance of a particular object of criminal legal protection, including the danger of harm caused to it, are formally reflected in the sanction.

A complex violent crime is classified under one article (or part) in cases where the sanction for such a crime is more severe than the sanctions for the use of physical violence in the relevant articles of Chapter 16 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Thus, the elements of abuse of power include the use of violence or the threat of its use as a qualifying feature (clause “a”, part 3 of article 286 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). Based on the severity of the sanctions for this crime (imprisonment for a term of three to ten years), the scope of physical violence in this article also covers torture (Article 117 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), since the maximum punishment for torture, taking into account the qualifying circumstances, is imprisonment from three to seven years. Otherwise, qualification based on the totality of crimes would be required.

The difference between the aggregate and complex individual crimes

The commission of individual acts that are particularly complex differs from the totality only in their quantitative component. When studying complex individual cases, one can note the apparent multiplicity. As a rule, such crimes are continuous, ongoing and compound.

Continuing crimes are characterized by their execution in parts, i.e. for individual criminal acts that have a common goal, allowing these steps to be combined into one crime. Such acts are characterized by the presence of an intentional form of guilt.

Continuing acts are distinguished by their continuity, which means the presence of a public danger over a certain period. The action itself looks stretched out, but is unified.

Such crimes can be recognized as compound crimes, the circle of which includes several independent actions, united by internal unity and interconnection. Such crimes can be presented as one act with several consequences.

Single crimes, which are particularly complex, have a large number of similarities with multiple ones, but, in essence, they are fundamentally different from each other. The totality of actions of complex crimes must be assessed as parts of a single act, based on the interconnections of the criminal’s internal desire to achieve results. Plurality is formed as a result of several illegal actions, each of which relates to a separate crime.

Assignment of punishments for a set of crimes

Conclusions about a person's guilt can only be made by a court. The act of justice that determines the punishment of the guilty person is the sentence. Punishment or release from it is the result of justice. In the process of determining the measure and amount of punishment, the court uses the provisions of the General Part of the Criminal Code, namely Art. 60.

A set of crimes that were committed by a single entity is subject to consideration in one trial. Of particular importance is the use by justice of general and sectoral principles that must be followed when choosing a punishment.

The presence of signs of criminality in a person’s actions can only be established on the basis of the Criminal Code. It is strictly prohibited to allow an analogy of the law in these cases.

The procedure for imposing punishments for two or more crimes is determined by the criminal law system, which had significant differences at different historical stages of the industry’s existence.

The current Criminal Code establishes a provision according to which the court imposes separate punishments for each individual criminal act, if a person has committed several crimes.

The process of applying population rules has two stages. At the first stage, the punishment is determined in relation to each individual act, and at the second, a cumulative punishment is assigned, which is recognized as final.

The presence of such stages is the fundamental basis for imposing a general punishment, with a mandatory determination of the scope of responsibility in relation to each of the acts.

Responsibility measures provided for in the form of punishments can absorb each other or be combined. In addition, the court has the right to impose a primary punishment for one act, and an additional one for the second, which is characterized by a low level of public danger.

Types of multiplicity of crimes

Note 1

In the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation We have already completed coursework

The topic is highlighted in more detail by the following types of multiplicity of crimes:

totality of crime;
relapse (repeated commission) of a crime.

An independent type of multiple crimes includes a combination of sentences. This type is observed when the totality of crimes and the repeated commission of a crime do not cover cases of committing a new crime while serving a sentence for the first act, if at least one of the crimes was committed through negligence.

The plurality of crimes has different criminal legal consequences. In accordance with Art. 69, the commission of two or more crimes for which a person has not been prosecuted may become the basis for imposing a criminal penalty based on the actual totality. In situations where a new crime is committed while serving a sentence, it is possible to apply the rule of cumulative sentences (Article 70).

The commission of a crime is considered again as an aggravating circumstance, which must be taken into account by the court when assigning punishment (Article 63). Establishment of recidivism of crimes in accordance with Art. 68 obliges the court to impose a punishment of at least 1/3 of the maximum term of the highest type of punishment provided for committing this crime.

If there are multiple crimes, the person who committed them is excluded from the possibility of certain forms of exemption from criminal liability (which is applicable if the crime was committed for the first time). Establishing the type of multiplicity of crimes affects the assignment of punishment and entails different criminal legal consequences.

Assignment of punishment based on cumulative sentences

The concept of cumulative sentences refers to the types of multiplicity of criminal acts. Considering the content of this concept, you can see that it is impossible for it to cover repetition, aggregates or relapse.

The lack of a precise definition in the legislation entails ambiguity in the selection of rules within the boundaries of which the choice of punishments is carried out.

It is generally accepted that a set of sentences means the commission of a new crime by a person, which, according to the time criterion, corresponds to the period of time lasting after the pronouncement of the sentence, but limited to the full serving of the sentence under this sentence.

In the presence of such circumstances, the application of the rule of absorption by a more severe punishment of a less severe punishment does not apply.