Lawyer

Chapter 477 Death Penalty and Indefinite Life

The inspector sitting at the top opposite finally recognized Fang Yi, and thought: It's this guy again, this guy is so good at talking.Thanks to the well-prepared, otherwise he would have been bluffed.

"The prosecutor can respond to the defender's defense opinion." The presiding judge said.

"In response to the defender's defense, the public prosecutor made the following observations:
[-]. The death penalty is applicable in this case
We believe that the "causing the kidnapped person's death" stipulated in Article 230 of the old "Criminal Law" should include the killing of the kidnapped person. 'Killing a kidnapped person' should include the act of killing but not causing death.That is to say, 'causing the kidnapped person's death' is a stipulation of aggravated consequences, while 'killing the abducted person' is a stipulation of aggravated circumstances.

In this case, the defendant Sun Dalin intentionally hurt the victim during the kidnapping, causing the victim to be seriously injured. Applying the death penalty to the defendant is in line with the legislative intent of Article 230 of the old Criminal Law.

Moreover, the Criminal Law Amendment ([-]) also adheres to this idea, and amends the second paragraph of the crime of kidnapping to read: Whoever commits the crime in the preceding paragraph, kills the kidnapped person, or deliberately injures the kidnapped person, causing serious injury or death, shall be sentenced to life imprisonment Imprisonment or death penalty.

Therefore, it is appropriate to apply the death penalty to the defendant in this case.

[-]. In this case, several crimes should be punished together.

In this case, the defendant, Sun Dalin, deliberately injured the victim during the continuous state of kidnapping, causing serious injuries. The means were particularly cruel. We believe that it is necessary to evaluate this separately.

If the defendant's harmful behavior is "absorbed" in the crime of kidnapping, no matter how much money is extorted and how much the victim is hurt, as long as the victim does not die, the maximum sentence can only be life imprisonment.We believe that this is suspected of an imbalance between the crime and the punishment.Therefore, the defendant's injury should be classified as the crime of intentional injury.The behavior of the defendant should be punished according to the crime of kidnapping and the crime of intentional injury.complete. " said the inspector.

"The defender can respond to the prosecutor's opinion." The presiding judge said.

The presiding judge already had a general idea of ​​the verdict of the case in his mind. There was no other way. There were too many cases in his hand. Before the trial, he just glanced at the case to understand the case. It's up to the trial.

"In response to the Prosecutor's defense opinion and response, the defender issued the following defense opinion:

[-]. The death penalty should not be applied in this case
The defender believes that the "Criminal Law" has the principle of both the old and the lighter, so the newly revised "Criminal Law" should not be applied to this case.The public prosecutor's defense opinion has certain flaws for the following reasons:

1. If "killing a kidnapped person" is understood to include not only the consequences of killing but also the act of killing, it will inevitably lead to the fact that as long as there is a killing act, no matter whether it causes minor injury, serious injury, serious disability or death, it can only be sentenced without exception. The death penalty does not conform to the principle of adapting the punishment to the crime and violates the original intention of the legislation.

The defender believes that the legislative intent of Article 230 of the old "Criminal Law" is to emphasize that the death of the victim must be the result.

2. When judicial interpretations and relevant laws do not make special provisions on the word "killing", the meaning of the word "killing" should follow the understanding of ordinary people, and should not be arbitrarily expanded or limited. As a daily term, the word 'kill' includes the meaning of 'kill', but it emphasizes 'harm', which is the result of 'death'.

3. The term "killing" has appeared many times in the criminal law, such as Article 310 and Article 320 of the "Criminal Law". 'Besides, another crime needs to be evaluated separately, and several crimes should be punished together.

But in the crime of kidnapping, "killing" is configured with the death penalty, so the interpretation of the crime of kidnapping must be strictly controlled.According to the provisions of the old "New Law", the death penalty should not be applied in this case.

[-]. This case is defined as the crime of kidnapping, and there is no 'imbalance between crime and punishment'.

The defender does not object to the application of combined punishment for several crimes in the crime of kidnapping. If the defendant Sun Dalin’s method of injury is so cruel that the victim is severely disabled, or the method of killing is extremely bad and the consequences are particularly serious, the defendant should be sentenced to death. The act of killing and wounding at this time should and must be evaluated separately. The defendant constitutes the crime of kidnapping and intentional injury (or intentional homicide) and shall be punished for several crimes.

If the above situation occurs, although the defendant cannot be sentenced to death according to the crime of kidnapping, according to the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law on the crime of intentional injury and intentional homicide, the court can sentence the defendant to death, so there is no imbalance between crime and punishment.

However, in this case, the behavior of the defendant does not have the above-mentioned circumstances, and the punishment according to the crime of kidnapping will not lead to an imbalance between the crime and the punishment. "

……

"... this case has been deliberated by the collegial panel and has formed a judgment opinion. In view of the opinions of the prosecution and the defense, combined with the focus of the dispute in this case, and based on the facts and evidence of this case, this court makes the following comments:

This court believes that the defendant Sun Dalin killed the kidnapped person during the kidnapping process and caused serious injuries. His behavior constituted the crime of kidnapping and should be severely punished in accordance with the law. According to the provisions of Article 230 of the "Criminal Law of the Kidnapping, sentenced to death, deprived of political rights for life. " said the presiding judge.

After hearing the verdict, Sun Dalin slumped down on the dock. As the saying goes, "It's better to live than to die." Although he likes to get into a dead end, it doesn't mean that he is so persistent on the issue of death. Now the hope in his heart is gone.

Sun Dalin refused to accept it and said in court that he would appeal.Fang Yi also felt that the death penalty in this case was too far-fetched and inconsistent with the law. After returning to the law firm, he began to prepare for the appeal that afternoon.

A few days later, the criminal verdict came down. After Fang Yi drafted the petition, he met with Sun Dalin again to confirm his willingness to appeal. Sun Dalin decisively signed the petition. After leaving the detention center, Fang Yi submitted the petition to the Central Committee. hospital.

Soon after, the second trial of Luo Daying's robbery case was held in the Provincial High Court.

Fang Yi pleaded a misdemeanor, because neither the prosecution nor the defense nor the appellant had disputed the facts of the case, only the sentencing was disputed, so the case went to trial very quickly.

Fang Yi still insisted on the defense opinion of lenient crime in the first instance, and the prosecutor insisted that the sentence of the first instance was appropriate.After the trial, the presiding judge announced the verdict in court.

After the hearing, the Provincial High Court held that: the court of first instance found that the appellant Luo Daying carried an ax and robbed a bank depositor of RMB 50.

The behavior of the appellant Luo Daying has constituted the crime of robbery.The original conviction was accurate and the trial procedure was legal. In view of the fact that the appellant Luo Daying did not cause any personal injury to the victim during the crime, and did not resist with arms when he was arrested, this case has not yet caused serious consequences. According to the principle of adapting the crime to the punishment, the original sentence was sentencing too heavy.

The appeal grounds and defense opinions of the appellant Luo Daying and his defenders for 'excessive punishment' are valid, and this court accepts them.Pursuant to Article 180(260) of the "Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China", Article 260([-]) of the "People's Republic of China Criminal Law", Article [-]([-]), ([-]) and [-] and the Supreme People's Court According to Article [-] of the Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Trial of Robbery Cases, the judgment is as follows:

[-]. Uphold the conviction of defendant Luo Daying in the criminal judgment of the Intermediate People's Court, and revoke the sentencing part.

[-]. The appellant (defendant in the original trial) Luo Daying committed the crime of robbery and was sentenced to life imprisonment, deprivation of political rights for life, and confiscation of all personal property.

(End of this chapter)