立陶宛法院实践中刑事处罚合并的特殊性和最终判决的公正性

Darius Pranka
{"title":"立陶宛法院实践中刑事处罚合并的特殊性和最终判决的公正性","authors":"Darius Pranka","doi":"10.15388/crimlithuan.2023.11.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholars of criminal law have not considered the issue of consolidation of criminal penalties for some time, and it has been undeservedly forgotten. However, the method of consolidation of criminal penalties and the size of the final punishment are very important for the defendant. In addition, in judicial practice, there are often various problems related to the correct and appropriate summation of sentences. It is sometimes very easy to get lost in the labyrinths of sentence sizes, numbers and calculation of the last sentence. The article begins by presenting a negative example of judicial practice, when the lower court, ignoring the decision of the appeal court, decides to postpone the execution of the prison sentence after the sentence has been combined. Next, the author raises the question of why criminal law provides only the minimum amount of penalties to be added. Still, when putting together several sentences, adding at least the minimum part of the penalties is not mandatory. On the other hand, in the context of this problem, we can reasonably doubt whether, in cases where the offender commits several dozen or several hundred criminal acts, putting together the punishments and adding a minimum part of each punishment, the last punishment is not too severe. Finally, at the end of the article, the difficulties of putting together punishments are shown when punishments have to be shared by simultaneous application of Article 63 of the Criminal Code and Article 64 of the Criminal Code.","PeriodicalId":52861,"journal":{"name":"Kriminologijos studijos","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Peculiarities of consolidation of criminal penalties and the justice of the final sentence in the practice of Lithuanian courts\",\"authors\":\"Darius Pranka\",\"doi\":\"10.15388/crimlithuan.2023.11.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Scholars of criminal law have not considered the issue of consolidation of criminal penalties for some time, and it has been undeservedly forgotten. However, the method of consolidation of criminal penalties and the size of the final punishment are very important for the defendant. In addition, in judicial practice, there are often various problems related to the correct and appropriate summation of sentences. It is sometimes very easy to get lost in the labyrinths of sentence sizes, numbers and calculation of the last sentence. The article begins by presenting a negative example of judicial practice, when the lower court, ignoring the decision of the appeal court, decides to postpone the execution of the prison sentence after the sentence has been combined. Next, the author raises the question of why criminal law provides only the minimum amount of penalties to be added. Still, when putting together several sentences, adding at least the minimum part of the penalties is not mandatory. On the other hand, in the context of this problem, we can reasonably doubt whether, in cases where the offender commits several dozen or several hundred criminal acts, putting together the punishments and adding a minimum part of each punishment, the last punishment is not too severe. Finally, at the end of the article, the difficulties of putting together punishments are shown when punishments have to be shared by simultaneous application of Article 63 of the Criminal Code and Article 64 of the Criminal Code.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kriminologijos studijos\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kriminologijos studijos\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15388/crimlithuan.2023.11.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kriminologijos studijos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/crimlithuan.2023.11.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

刑法学者已经有一段时间没有考虑刑罚合并的问题了,这个问题被无端遗忘。然而,刑罚合并的方法和最终刑罚的大小对被告人来说非常重要。此外,在司法实践中,经常会遇到各种与正确、恰当地进行刑罚合并有关的问题。有时,我们很容易迷失在刑期大小、数字和最后刑期计算的迷宫中。文章首先介绍了司法实践中的一个反面例子,即下级法院无视上诉法院的判决,在刑期合并后决定推迟执行监禁刑罚。接着,作者提出了一个问题:为什么刑法只规定了附加刑的最低刑罚量?尽管如此,在合并几项判决时,至少增加最低部分的刑罚并不是强制性的。另一方面,就这一问题而言,我们有理由怀疑,在犯罪人实施了几十或几百种犯罪行为的情况下,将刑罚放在一起并加上每种刑罚的最低部分,最后的刑罚是否过于严厉。最后,在文章的最后,当必须同时适用《刑法典》第 63 条和《刑法典》第 64 条来分担惩罚时,就会显示出合并惩罚的困难。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Peculiarities of consolidation of criminal penalties and the justice of the final sentence in the practice of Lithuanian courts
Scholars of criminal law have not considered the issue of consolidation of criminal penalties for some time, and it has been undeservedly forgotten. However, the method of consolidation of criminal penalties and the size of the final punishment are very important for the defendant. In addition, in judicial practice, there are often various problems related to the correct and appropriate summation of sentences. It is sometimes very easy to get lost in the labyrinths of sentence sizes, numbers and calculation of the last sentence. The article begins by presenting a negative example of judicial practice, when the lower court, ignoring the decision of the appeal court, decides to postpone the execution of the prison sentence after the sentence has been combined. Next, the author raises the question of why criminal law provides only the minimum amount of penalties to be added. Still, when putting together several sentences, adding at least the minimum part of the penalties is not mandatory. On the other hand, in the context of this problem, we can reasonably doubt whether, in cases where the offender commits several dozen or several hundred criminal acts, putting together the punishments and adding a minimum part of each punishment, the last punishment is not too severe. Finally, at the end of the article, the difficulties of putting together punishments are shown when punishments have to be shared by simultaneous application of Article 63 of the Criminal Code and Article 64 of the Criminal Code.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
32 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信