?
Квалификация отдельных эпизодов продолжаемого преступления в качестве самостоятельного преступления
In the article the authors analyze the essence of a continuous criminal off ense in order to formulate an answer to the question of what algorithm of actions of law enforcers is correct when identifying episodes not included previously in the scope of criminal charge, related to a continuous criminal off ense for which a defendant has already been convicted. As part of the research, the authors have identifi ed three possible approaches used in practice by the courts: termination of the criminal case under paragraph 4 part 1 of Article 27 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation; conviction of a person on new episodes of the continuous criminal off ense and sentencing under the rules of Article 69 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; resumption of criminal proceedings due to new circumstances. The third approach was reasonably rejected by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on the grounds that the institution of reopening of criminal proceedings cannot be used to correct investigative errors. At the same time the predominance was given to the second approach, which consists in the fact that after conviction of a person for a continuous criminal off ense a new criminal case on separate episodes of that same continuous criminal off ense, not included previously in the scope of criminal charge, is referred to the court, as a result of which an artifi cial multiple crime arises. In the authors’ opinion, the fi rst approach, implying the termination of criminal prosecution, should be recognized as the correct one, and the protection of victims’ rights should be carried out exclusively within civil proceedings under the rules of Chapter 59 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.