SENTENCING FOR A CRIME COMMITTED IN COMPLICITY

Abstract

Introduction. The Institute of complicity in the science of the criminal law has received and continues to receive close attention. Signs of complicity, forms and types of complicity, rules to qualify crimes committed in complicity, and much more are discussed in detail. However, as a rule, special attention is not paid to the issues of sentencing for a crime committed in complicity. The article deals with the problems of sentencing for a crime committed in complicity. The purpose of the study is to analyze the theory and practice of sentencing for a crime committed in complicity, to formulate their own proposals for improving the sentencing of accomplices. Materials and methods. The study is based on the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation on imposing punishment for a crime committed in complicity, as well as the practice of their application. The research methodology includes the use of such methods as axiological, logical, methods of analysis and synthesis, which makes it possible to significantly expand the subject of research. However, due to the specifics of the study, the methods of system-structural and functional analysis are used as the main ones. Study results. There are no rules in the criminal law for imposing punishment to accomplices of a crime. The authors analyzed Article 67 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, dedicated to imposing punishment for a crime committed in complicity. The specified norm contains only evaluation categories. Therefore, the guideline specified in Article 67 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation when imposing punishment for a crime committed in complicity cannot be considered suitable for the practice of sentencing. Qualifying signs related to complicity are considered separately. Committing a crime as part of a certain criminal group entails imposing a more severe punishment. The authors analyzed the proposals available in the scientific literature concerning the introduction of rules for sentencing as part of a criminal group. However, the proposals are based solely on analogy with the special rules of sentencing already available in the criminal law, there is no justification for the limits of adding greater punitive measures: three-quarters, two-thirds, three-fifths, one-third, etc. It seems that this approach is not based on factual data confirming the specific limits of adding greater punitive measures. The analysis of judicial practice of sentencing for a crime committed as part of a criminal group leads to the conclusion that there are problems due to the presence of a conflict in the criminal law: the presence in the criminal law of such an aggravating circumstance as committing a crime as part of a group of persons, a group of persons by prior agreement, by an organized group or a criminal community (criminal organization) and the similarly-named qualifying signs of the elements of crimes provided for in the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. According to the authors, it is necessary to eliminate the conflict between circumstances related to complicity, aggravating punishment, and similar signs of the corpus delict by excluding qualifying features of articles of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, identical to circumstances aggravating punishment, while providing for certain rules for sentencing for a crime committed as part of a criminal group. Conclusions. Since the qualified composition of a crime as part of a criminal group, as a rule, changes the category of the crime to a more serious one, in the case of a person committing a crime as part of a group of persons, a group of persons by prior agreement, an organized group or a criminal community (criminal organization), the court should be able to change the category of the crime to a more serious one and inflict a stricter punishment than stipulated by the relevant article of the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation for the crime committed.