Examination on criminal law (2009)
In the winter evening underpopulated unlit street Mugalimovu stopped Nurimanov bull terrier owner and seizing the hand, demanded to stay in a mink coat and jewelry. When this bull terrier, which was without a leash and muzzle, standing next to the master and growled. Frightened dogs growling menacingly, Mugalimova broke and ran, pursued Nurimanovym. Darting in the wrong place carriageway close to oncoming traffic, she slipped and fell three meters from the approaching tanker, controlled by the driver Granskov. Granskov, who led the vehicle in compliance with the Rules of the road, took measures of emergency braking, but in icy conditions could not stop the tanker. Mugalimova fell under the wheels of the tank truck and received at running injuries died.
Analyze the objective side of the crime (or crimes of data).
Can we assume that Nurimanov committed an offense under Part. 2 tbsp. 162 of the Criminal Code, ie, robbery with the use of the object used as a weapon?
Expand the rules for establishing causation in criminal law.
Are the actions Nurimanova a causal relationship with the death Mugalimovoy?
Are the actions Granskov in a causal connection with the death Mugalimovoy?
Solve the question of a causal connection between the death Mugalimovoy and behavior of the following persons:
- Chief DRSU who organized the treatment of road surfaces with a mixture of sand and salt in icy conditions;
- The operator of urban power grids, according to the schedule to disable power-saving lighting in the streets, killing Mugalimova.
Spring Ruchkin single pensioner on his backyard among the flowers and vegetables planted opium poppy. At the beginning of summer for a long time he got to the hospital, instructing Somov neighbor to look after the house and stipulating that to care for plants is not necessary. However, Somov, finding that the area planted and is already beginning to fade narcotic plants, I decided to grow it before returning Ruchkina, hoping that thanks to share with him Ruchkin ripe harvest. All summer he took care of crops, watered them, weeded, fertilized. His calculation was correct - the fall Ruchkin Somov and gathered a large harvest of mature poppy, dividing it in half.
Uncover the objective and subjective signs of complicity in a crime and decide whether Ruchkin Somov and partners in crime. Explain your answer, including a subjective analysis of the relationship between the partners.
From the viewpoint of the doctrine of complicity give a legal assessment of the criminal acts of each of the entities in the following variants of the problem.
Option 1: Calculation of Luba was wrong - "ungrateful" Ruchkin returned from the hospital and harvest poppy grown Somov, not shared with him.
Option 2. Going to the hospital, told Ruchkin Somov of crops, among them, it was agreed that Somov grow opium poppy and the entire crop will pick himself.
The verdict of the Court of April 22, 2006 Svidersky convicted of claim. "In" h. 2 tablespoons. 240 of the Criminal Code to imprisonment for a term of 1.5 years imprisonment in a penal colony.
Earlier Svidersky has twice been convicted of serious crimes (both - in the age of majority) to real imprisonment in connection with the determination of the term of imprisonment and the appointment of the correctional institution Court discussed the issue of the presence in the actions Svidersky especially dangerous relapse. Given the fact that the two previous convictions at the time of sentencing April 22, 2006 were repaid, but not redeemed at the time of the commission of an offense under subsection. "In" Art. 240 of the Criminal Code, the court acknowledged the actions Svidersky especially dangerous relapse.
Is the decision of the court the legislative definition of "recidivism" and established criminal law pra