FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W231864910> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W231864910 startingPage "446" @default.
• W231864910 abstract "ABSTRACT.The criminal offence continued as a criminal unit is the legal expression of objective reality, actions-inactions appear as parts of a single criminal activities carried out in time, based on a unique resolution and straightened out to produce a global result, as the sum of the results generated by each individual action-inaction.Keywords: continued offence, punishment, criminal unity, criminal resolutionDuring the evolution of criminal regulations, the continued offence issue arose from the need to mitigate the severity of punishments applied in the case of repeating the same facts, at short time intervals.Italian authors emphasize that the continued offence originates in the practice of medieval Italian lawyers, who were seeking thus to mitigate the severe punishment to which those who committed offences of the same kind, repeated several times, were exposed.1The notion of continued offence was drafted in the twelfth century by glossators: When several offences have the same objective, they are punished as one, if committed separately in the course of a single aggressive action, or in the course of various aggressive actions, which means that if you insult someone and that hurts him, you are punished only for the harm, because you have insulted with the purpose of harming.2Later, this concept was developed in feudal law flourishing period, as a reaction to harden penalties of the time. The modeling of the legal thinking during feudalism generated innovative visions in dealing with cases of committing one and the same criminal act, repeatedly, especially when they were committed under identical circumstances.The situation required a remedy, especially in relation to the offence of theft. For the theft, even trivial, the perpetrator was liable to the death penalty: si tarnen reiteratur tertia vice, potest tribus fiurtis, quamvis minimis, poena mortis imponi (If he still reiterates three times, he may be punished by death, even for three very small thefts). To avoid the application of this penalty and, in general, not to proceed to the accumulation of penalties set for similar repeated crimes, it was considered - in relation to certain criteria, about the time and place of the crime committing etc. - that the ensemble of several crimes of the same kind committed sequentially, constituted a single offence. Also, as a consequence, it was decided, especially concerning the offence of adultery, that in such cases, the prescription began to run from the date of termination of the criminal activity.3F. Carrara, followed by most authors, believed that the elaboration of the continued offence concept was due to Julius Clarus and Prosper Farinacius, legal practitioners from the 16th and 17th centuries, whose work exerted immense influence on judicial practice in all Western European countries until the eve of the French Revolution. Farinaicus claimed that it was not considered that there were more thefts, but one, when someone stole a thing or more, from the same place, but at different moments, continuously and successively. Another lawyer practicing at the time, Bendictus Carpsovius conceived also the singulis delictis singulae poenae completât rule (one sentence for each offence).4Referring to Romanian criminal doctrine, we can grasp that initially, a clear distinction between the continuous offence and the continued offence could not be made. For example, I. Tanoviceanu did not distinguish between the two categories of offences, encompassing the continued offence into the continuous offence. The author considered the continuity as being an obscure and controversial theory and proposed to abandon it, not being necessary anymore, as long as, on the one hand, the law did not provide excessive punishment for a third offence committed, and on the other hand, for the extension of the prescription period in the case of continuous offences, there was no need for a division of instantaneous and continuous offences. …" @default.
• W231864910 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W231864910 creator A5083532912 @default.
• W231864910 date "2013-07-01" @default.
• W231864910 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W231864910 title "Considerations regarding the Legal Nature of the Continued Offence" @default.
• W231864910 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W231864910 type Work @default.
• W231864910 sameAs 231864910 @default.
• W231864910 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W231864910 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W231864910 hasAuthorship W231864910A5083532912 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C202565627 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C2777363581 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C2779295839 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C2780791683 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C2781017355 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C2993215758 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C511693568 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C73484699 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C77805123 @default.
• W231864910 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C121332964 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C15744967 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C17744445 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C199539241 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C202565627 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C2777363581 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C2779295839 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C2780791683 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C2781017355 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C2993215758 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C511693568 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C62520636 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C73484699 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C77805123 @default.
• W231864910 hasConceptScore W231864910C94625758 @default.
• W231864910 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W231864910 hasLocation W2318649101 @default.
• W231864910 hasOpenAccess W231864910 @default.
• W231864910 hasPrimaryLocation W2318649101 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2059692153 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2128557918 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2137987031 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2154371983 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2212306494 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2235803246 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2297806353 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2363039994 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2561244273 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2644876053 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W2905471105 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W3122651802 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W3124160620 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W3125153455 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W3128987879 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W3162432750 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W318990421 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W342290421 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W769985660 @default.
• W231864910 hasRelatedWork W837562460 @default.
• W231864910 hasVolume "5" @default.
• W231864910 isParatext "false" @default.
• W231864910 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W231864910 magId "231864910" @default.
• W231864910 workType "article" @default.