Set of crimes: features, types

In various criminal law systems , the problem of assigning punishments for several committed crimes and the issue of the punishment limit is solved in different ways. One of the options, recognized in the criminal law of many states, is a set of crimes, including special principles for the appointment of punishments.

Such a system has been used for a long time, since the Roman law. In those days there was such a thing as "poena major absorbet poenam minorem", meaning that a smaller punishment is absorbed by a larger one. That is, the set of crimes provides for a series of committed crimes the only punishment concerning the most serious of them. Many criminologists have repeatedly pointed to the imperfection of such a system, believing that the sentence passed on the principle of "seven troubles - one answer" - ineffective. A criminal who has committed several criminal acts is absolutely indifferent to their number, especially he is indifferent to those crimes that caused a minimal evil. Many believe that, in fact, the criminal murderer, who has also committed violence with theft, is not responsible for the latter named actions.

So, the set of crimes - the commission by one person of several homogeneous, identical, as well as heterogeneous crimes, simultaneously or consistently. It is understood that this person has not previously been punished for any of them. All committed crimes can be qualified either by several independent articles, or by different parts of one of the articles, or by one article of the Criminal Code.

Along with the very legal concept, there is a division into the types of the aggregate of crimes. In accordance with the new approach to the concept of the aggregate, two of its following varieties are distinguished in the criminal law of the Russian Federation. The first of these is the totality of crimes that qualify as a single article of the Criminal Code; The second - crimes that are qualified by several articles (parts of the article).

In the theory of criminal law and in existing jurisprudence, two subspecies of the set of crimes are distinguished: ideal and real. It is customary to speak of an ideal population in those cases when one or more separate elements of a crime are performed by one subject in the course of one act (inaction) . Example: intentional homicide in relation to one person, and at the same time injuring on imprudence of the second victim. The main features of an ideal set of crimes include their simultaneity.

It is customary to speak of a real aggregate if each individual crime is final, or if one of the crimes is considered a preparation for the commission of another, more serious act. In the case of a real population, a person can be either a perpetrator or an accomplice, an instigator or organizer of a crime. Example: a citizen attacked another person for the purpose of kidnapping a cell phone, and a little later when detained, he resisted police officers using life-threatening violence. These actions are classified collectively by two articles: No. 161, Part 1, and No. 318, Part 2.

Along with the aggregate, another type of crime is considered, which has some similarity with this concept - the ongoing crime. This is a series of identical homogeneous acts of a criminal nature that are aimed at achieving a single goal. Continued crimes are often confused with an ideal aggregate, but they differ by the main feature - the time of committing an act. If, with an ideal population, as already mentioned, crimes are committed at the same time, the continued crime can be committed for an extended period of time. Example: a person decided to collect a TV set at home. Since the workplace of the citizen is a plant of television equipment, he for some time committed the theft of the necessary details from his place of work. The beginning of this continued crime is the fact of the first theft, by analogy, the end of the crime is the last theft from the plant.