Nusikalstamų veikų daugeto samprata: teorinės ir praktinės problemos.
MetadataShow full item record
This article examines the concept of multiple offenses and explores both theoretical and practical problems. The understanding of the concept of multiple offenses is, not unanimous, and two different approaches to the concept of multiple offenses may be distinguished. The first group of scientists associates multiple offenses with the commitment of two or more criminal acts, regardless of whether the person was convicted for the previous offenses or not. The second group, which is supported by the author of the article, associates multiple offenses only with two or more criminal acts committed before the conviction for one of them. According to the common opinion of the second group of scientists, recidivism is not a form of multiple offenses and only two forms should be distinguished: crimes made by a single act (“ideal coincidence of crimes”) and crimes made by different acts (“real coincidence of crimes”). The author identifies the following attributes of the concept of multiple offenses: 1) a person is prosecuted for several offenses; 2) these offenses are committed before a conviction for making them. The author does not support the need for the third commonly known attribute of the concept of multiple offenses (an absence of legal barriers for prosecution) and proposes to define the concept of multiple offenses with reference to the two abovementioned attributes. What is more, possible solutions to the problem which arises when criminal and administrative offenses are committed by a single act are suggested in this article. The second attribute defines that these two or more offenses should be committed before a conviction for making them. This can be done in three ways: 1) when several criminal acts are made before the conviction for one of them for which a person is held liable under one sentence; 2) when several criminal acts are made before the conviction for one of them but the person who committed these crimes is held liable under several sentences; 3) when a person who was conditionally exempted from criminal liability commits a new crime and is held liable for both offenses under one sentence. The final problem discussed in this article is the lack of unanimous court practice in defining the concept of multiple offenses. In some cases of the Supreme Court of Lithuania a person is held convicted after the sentence was announced, and in other cases a person is held convicted after the sentence has come into effect. Therefore, it is complicated to separate when multiple offenses were made and when recidivism took place. In the opinion of the author, a person should be held convicted after the sentence was announced. Finally, the author suggests defining multiple offenses as a situation when a person is held liable for several crimes which were committed before a conviction for one of them.
- Straipsniai / Articles