1. Voluntary renunciation of a crime is the cessation by a person of preparation for a crime or the cessation of actions (inaction) directly aimed at committing a crime, if the person was aware of the possibility of bringing the crime to completion. 2. A person is not subject to criminal liability for a crime if he voluntarily and finally refused to complete this crime.
3. A person who voluntarily refuses to complete a crime is subject to criminal liability if the act actually committed by him contains a different corpus delicti.
4. The organizer of a crime and the instigator of a crime are not subject to criminal liability if these persons prevented the perpetrator from completing the crime by timely reporting to the authorities or other measures taken. An accomplice to a crime is not subject to criminal liability if he has taken all measures within his power to prevent the commission of the crime.
5. If the actions of the organizer or instigator, provided for in part four of this article, did not lead to the prevention of the commission of a crime by the perpetrator, then the measures taken by them may be recognized by the court as mitigating circumstances when imposing punishment.
Definition of crime
First, let's look at what a crime is.
According to the definition of the Criminal Code, crimes are guiltily committed, socially dangerous actions that are prohibited by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and for which mandatory punishment will follow.
A crime can be considered specific actions, not thoughts or desire to do something illegal. Illegal actions take two forms:
- action (active participation in a crime);
- inaction (passive participation).
Also, an action is not considered criminal if it is carried out under pressure, not of one’s own will. If a person was insane, that is, did not understand the nature of his actions, then he cannot be punished. But the result is completely different if criminal acts were committed by a person who at that time was under the influence of alcohol or drugs, then he bears criminal liability. Also, this circumstance will in no way mitigate the guilt of the criminal.
Everyone is in the same position before the law, regardless of gender, race, social status, and so on.
Let's look at the nature of the crimes being committed.
Characteristics of crimes
All crimes are divided, first of all, according to the degree of danger to society, and the severity of the punishment is determined accordingly. They are:
- Minor crimes. This includes criminal acts that were committed intentionally or as a result of careless actions. The punishment for such acts is no less than 24 months imprisonment.
- Moderate weight. Retribution for such acts will be in the form of imprisonment for at least 24 months, but not more than 60 months.
- Serious crimes. They are punished more severely; they can be imprisoned for a period of 10 years, but no more.
- Criminal acts classified as especially serious. For such illegal actions the prison term is more than 10 years.
Everything will depend on what category the crime is classified into. However, there are situations when a person voluntarily renounces a crime. The Criminal Code regards such actions from a completely different perspective. What is the significance of refusal and what is the difference between it and active repentance, we will consider further.
Voluntary renunciation of crime
I would like to note that if a person comes to his senses in time and does not commit the criminal acts that he wanted to carry out, then he has a good opportunity to evade punishment or criminal liability.
The concept of voluntary renunciation of a crime is a decisive cessation by a person, on his own initiative, of preparing for illegal actions or preventing a crime, provided that he realized that it was possible to complete the crime to the end.
It is possible to stop preparatory activities for illegal actions and stop unfinished criminal actions by acting both passively and actively. And you can only prevent actions that could complete a crime by acting actively.
At what stage is it possible to voluntarily renounce committing a crime? Next, we will consider the moments when you can abandon criminal plans.
The concept of voluntary renunciation of a crime and its difference from active repentance
The concept and legal nature of voluntary refusal to commit a crime
disclosed in Art. 31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. The institution of voluntary refusal was also known to the legislation of the RSFSR (for example, Article 16 of the Criminal Code of 1960), but in the article under consideration it is significantly expanded and modified.
The signs of voluntary refusal to commit a crime are formulated in Part 1 of Art. 31 CC:
- cessation of preparation for a crime or actions (inaction) directly aimed at its commission;
— the possibility of bringing the crime to completion;
- the person’s awareness of this possibility.
Thus, voluntary refusal is possible at the stage of preparation or attempted crime. The cessation of preparatory actions or the criminal offense itself must be obvious to the perpetrator.
The possibility of completing the crime must also be recognized by the perpetrator. This possibility may be evidenced by the circumstances of the place and time of the crime, the passivity of the victim or persons in whose presence the crime is committed. If the renunciation of criminal actions is due to their probable suppression by law enforcement officers arriving at the scene of the incident, there is an unfinished attempted crime. Voluntary renunciation of a completed attempt is possible only in crimes with a material element (for example, a person intends to cause serious harm to the health of the victim and for this purpose strikes him, but then provides him with medical assistance or takes him to the hospital, where it turns out that less serious harm was caused) . It should be noted that such cases are extremely rare and practically never occur in practice.
In Part 2 of Art. 31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes that a person who voluntarily and finally renounces committing a crime is not subject to criminal liability. Voluntariness
refusal means that this decision is made by the person independently, without any coercion. At the same time, the reason for making such a decision may be persuasion on the part of persons in authority. The motives for voluntary refusal can be anything: fear of criminal liability, pity for the victim, repentance. If a person attempts to commit a crime, but cannot enter any place and therefore refuses further criminal actions, this is also recognized as a voluntary refusal (for example, a person decides to commit theft from an office, for which he tries to break the bars on the window, but cannot do this do and leaves the scene).
Finality
refusal means that the criminal offense is stopped completely, and not postponed for a while. A temporary refusal to commit a crime may be associated with various circumstances that make its commission impossible or dangerous for the perpetrator (for example, a person searches for murder weapons, but postpones it due to financial problems). The complete cessation of preparation or attempt to commit a crime is a consequence of the person’s reluctance to commit an intentional crime.
Voluntary refusal to prepare for a crime can consist of passive behavior (abstaining from criminal acts) or active actions (destruction of the instruments of crime, dissuading accomplices, etc.).
If a person refuses to commit a crime at the attempted stage, voluntary refusal is possible only upon termination of the single criminal attack. In cases where a series of criminal attacks is committed, but the criminal result does not occur for reasons beyond the control of the person, and he refuses the next one, voluntary refusal is not recognized (for example, a person fires several shots at the victim, but misses and refuses further shots ). They are classified as an unfinished attempted crime.
Part 3 art. 31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes that a person who refuses to complete a crime can be held accountable if the act actually committed by him contains signs of another crime. For example, a person who broke a lock with the aim of entering a home and committing theft from it, but then decided not to commit a crime and did not enter the apartment, may be held liable under Part 1 of Art. 167 of the Criminal Code for damage to this lock, if the damage from it is significant for the victim.
Voluntary refusal, therefore, completely excludes the person’s responsibility for a crime that he intended to commit, but did not commit. At the same time, the actions of this person may actually contain elements of another crime (for example, illegal manufacturing of weapons), for which he is held accountable. Moreover, since the person refused to commit the main crime, the punishment for the actual act committed by him should be more lenient.
Voluntary renunciation must be distinguished from active repentance
, in which a person seeks to reconcile with the victim and make amends for the harm caused. Under certain conditions, active repentance entails release from criminal liability, but this is a non-rehabilitating basis, since it is associated with a full admission of guilt. Active repentance can manifest itself only after the commission of a completed crime, while voluntary renunciation consists in not completing the crime.
Voluntary refusal is a rehabilitating basis for release from criminal liability, since a person is aware not only of the wrongfulness of his own behavior (as in active repentance), but also takes actions that entail the cessation of a criminal attack.
Suitable moments for voluntary refusal
There are a number of moments when it is still possible to do this:
- If criminal actions are not completed, then there is an option to voluntarily abandon illegal actions. The opposite option will no longer be possible.
- If the crime is in the preparation stage, it is also possible to voluntarily refuse to continue it. At the same time, conditions appear to eliminate the basis for illegal actions.
- At the moment when the crime is completed, but after some time the criminal, as a result of active actions, manages to eliminate the consequences or prevent the serious results of previously committed actions.
- If a large amount of time has passed, and the criminal, as a result of unsuccessful actions, did not bring the case to its final conclusion, and decided to abandon the illegal actions, this will be considered as a refusal to re-commit the crime.
Objective and subjective signs of voluntary refusal to commit a crime
The main objective sign is the voluntary cessation of any actions that could otherwise lead to the creation of a socially dangerous situation.
If we talk about subjective signs, there are only a few of them:
- voluntary decision. A person is obliged to accept it independently and of his own free will, and not under someone else’s influence or the influence of irresistible forces. At the same time, the reasons why the person made such a decision do not play any role;
- understanding the possibility of completing a criminal act. Here we are talking about the subjective perception of a potential criminal;
- irrevocability. A person must make a final decision without returning to the thought of completing the crime/
These conditions must be met without fail.
Voluntary refusal is allowed at the stage of an unfinished attempt, when the person has not yet managed to cause any damage or harm to another person. As for the completed assassination attempt, when all previously planned actions have already been carried out, but have not yet led to the expected consequences for unknown reasons, here the refusal can be viewed in two ways. Such situations turn out to be controversial and the punishment is determined individually in each case.
Signs of voluntary refusal
In order not to fall under the article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it is necessary, on one’s own initiative, to irrevocably refuse to carry out the intended illegal actions to the final stage. There are signs of voluntary renunciation of crime:
- The most important sign is, first of all, the criminal’s refusal to carry out illegal actions to the end.
- It is important that this refusal is of free will, no matter whose idea it was. As a result of what circumstances he voluntarily refused, will not be taken into account. But if the refusal occurred because it is not possible to complete the crime, then this is not regarded as the fact that the person voluntarily abandoned illegal actions.
- The decision that it is necessary to voluntarily refuse was made decisively and irrevocably. The option that the violation of the law is postponed to a later time or that the crime is planned to be completed later is not allowed.
- The criminal is aware of his voluntary refusal to complete the crime, realizing that nothing can stop him from completing the process.
In order for there to be a desire to refuse and not bring illegal actions to completion, a motive is needed. Let's consider what motivation there may be.
Commentary on Article 31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation
1. In case of voluntary refusal, there is a cessation of preparation for a crime or a cessation of actions (inaction) directly aimed at committing a crime <1>. In relation to an action, this means stopping it; in relation to inaction, termination will be recognized as the beginning of the required action. A temporary stop in the commission of an act, for example, in order to wait for more favorable conditions for its continuation, cannot be considered termination. Termination of a crime upon voluntary refusal must be final, i.e. with no intention of resuming it.
——————————— <1> BVS of the Russian Federation. 1999. N 3.
2. Refusal to carry out a planned crime to completion excludes criminal liability for an attempted crime, however, if the actions already actually committed themselves contain the elements of a completed crime, the person cannot be released from liability for this crime. Thus, a person who began physical pressure in order to take the life of the victim, but refused to complete it, is not subject to liability for attempted murder, but must be held accountable for the actually completed infliction of bodily harm.
3. Voluntary refusal to complete a crime means that the person himself, of his own free will, and not forced or forced, stops the crime. The sign of voluntariness indicates the conscious and volitional nature of stopping the crime.
4. The cessation of a crime is forced, and not voluntary, if there is a real threat of exposure if it continues, or if it is impossible to complete the crime without significant harm to the health of the offender, and even more so to his life. The presence in these cases of a real threat subjugates the will, which does not correspond to the concept of voluntariness. At the same time, the motive for termination (pity, reluctance to be held accountable, moral principles, faith, etc.) does not matter for establishing voluntary refusal, since it does not exclude freedom of expression.
5. Voluntary refusal to complete a crime is objectively possible until its actual completion, and also until the person committing the crime has lost control over the forces he set in motion. You cannot renounce what has already been done, therefore any actions aimed at eliminating the consequences that resulted from the crime indicate the person’s repentance, but do not eliminate responsibility.
In case of loss of control over the forces set in motion during the commission of a crime, the negative changes made by a person in social relations become a fait accompli, a realized result. Thus, a person who fired a shot in order to take life, but missed, cannot refer to the fact that he had the opportunity to carry out his plan with a second shot. In this case, the person only does not repeat a new attack, and does not refuse the first one.
6. Determining the voluntariness of refusal to complete a crime is complicated when a crime is committed in complicity, when several people act, embodying the common will in the commission of one crime.
The responsibility of accomplices, although based on a general basis, is individual in nature, therefore, the refusal of one of the accomplices to complete the crime does not apply to the other accomplices and does not relieve them of liability. Thus, the refusal of the perpetrator of a crime to complete it does not relieve accomplices in other roles from responsibility, but at the same time makes it objectively impossible to complete it, as a result of which other accomplices will be held accountable for the attempted crime.
7. The organizer and instigator influence the consciousness of other accomplices, forming the determination to commit a crime, therefore their refusal to complete the crime presupposes the removal from the consciousness of the persons involved in the crime of intent to participate in the crime. Based on this, they must prevent the commission of a crime and the participation of these persons in it by reporting to government authorities or otherwise. Otherwise, the situation should be assessed as a loss of control over the development of the crime on their part, in which refusal to complete the crime is objectively impossible.
8. If the measures taken by the organizer and instigator did not lead to the prevention of the crime, then they are subject to liability, and the measures they took can be taken into account as mitigating circumstances when assigning punishment.
9. The role of an accomplice is secondary in complicity; therefore, the law requires him to take all necessary measures to prevent the crime. First of all, he must eliminate the assistance, the contribution that he makes to the crime, for example, withdraw those material resources that were provided to him for the commission of the crime.
Motives for voluntary refusal
When a person is already involved in criminal activity, be it in preparation or at the moment of committing illegal actions, motivation may arise, the result of which will be a voluntary refusal to commit a crime. What motivation could be:
- repentance;
- understanding the immorality of an act;
- willingness to correct the situation;
- fear of responsibility;
- lack of benefit;
- compassion.
And it doesn’t matter at all whether the criminal came to this on his own or whether someone helped this motive emerge. However, the result is very important. This way the criminal can sincerely repent of his evil thoughts.
Active repentance
Active repentance is the actions of the person who has broken the law, by which he confirms that he blames himself for what he has done and wants to atone for his guilt.
Fair and significant signs of repentance will be the active actions of a person who has broken the law. Subjective traits include disapproval by the culprit of the actions committed, that is, repentance. By combining the two signs, we get active repentance.
How does active repentance manifest itself?
If we talk about such a concept as voluntary renunciation of a crime, active repentance cannot be ignored. It can be expressed in the following forms:
- As a warning against disastrous results that appear in the process of illegal actions.
- Compensation for the damage caused, understanding of guilt and correction of the inconvenience caused.
- Participation in further investigation.
- Admission of guilt on one's own initiative.
- As well as other actions that mitigate the consequences of criminal acts committed, and guarantees for them.
Remorse and levels of remorse
If we consider the term “ repentance ” from the point of view of moral psychology, then we can come to the understanding that repentance means the call of conscience, the painful feeling that what is happening is not normal, conscience does not allow us to go further. When repenting, a person intends to follow the voice of conscience in the future.
There are the following levels of remorse :
- the criminal is ready to compensate for all material or moral damage incurred, he realizes that he was wrong and agrees with all the claims;
- the criminal also regrets his actions. He, having independently heard the voice of conscience, has a desire to correct his mistake;
- the criminal regrets his action and has figured out what prompted him to commit this act. He rethought and had a more complete understanding. In this regard, there are guarantees that this act will not be repeated in the future.
It feels like repentance can lead to a person beginning to change himself for the better. There is a possibility that this thinking will lead the criminal to become wiser and begin to feel responsible for his actions.
When investigating criminal cases, there is a tendency to take a formal approach to the concept of active repentance. Very often, criminals are exposed to the fact that they themselves expose themselves to committing an act by giving confessions. Often in court practice there are even more complicated cases when courts refer to the confession of persons who were unable to complete their criminal intent due to the fact that they were caught red-handed by law enforcement agencies. Nevertheless, the criminals subsequently agreed to make confessions, which were discussed in court sentences.
The meaning of voluntary refusal
If a person commits illegal actions, then until the crime has reached the final stage, it is permissible to correct everything. The significance of voluntary renunciation of crime is very great. This will affect the choice of punishment for the offender. Because:
- a person will not be criminally punished for unlawful actions committed, provided that he personally resolutely refused to bring these actions to a final conclusion;
- a citizen who independently decided not to bring a criminal plan to the final stage will be punished in accordance with the Criminal Code if, in reality, the crime committed has a different composition from the one committed.
Condition for recognizing refusal to commit a crime as voluntary
Experts name the only condition that must be met in order to recognize the refusal of the attempt as voluntary. A person acting as a criminal, having not completed the criminal act, having realized his guilt, must independently take all possible measures and prevent the onset of consequences. In this situation, the punishment will be as reduced as possible. There are cases in which complete acquittal can be achieved. It all depends on the specific circumstances.
Voluntary refusal to carry out a criminal act presupposes the absence of the need to bring a specific person to justice. But, if a person, while preparing for a crime, has already committed any violation, for example, acquired a weapon illegally, he will be held accountable to the law under the relevant article [23, p. 98].
Article 75 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation establishes the rule of exemption from criminal liability in connection with active repentance. However, the criminal law allows the latter as a circumstance exonerating from criminal liability only if certain conditions are met: the offender must come to the department himself and surrender, assist the investigative body in solving the crime, and also compensate for the damage caused or otherwise make amends. in front of the victim. As a result, it can be argued that the person repented and lost the status of a socially dangerous subject, thereby ceasing to be a threat to society.
Article 28 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation states that criminal prosecution can be terminated if the person under suspicion or accused of committing an unlawful act repents. According to Part 1 of this article, the investigator, having studied the case and having received permission from the head of the investigative body, as well as the investigator, having received the permission of the prosecutor, can terminate the criminal investigation against a person who is under suspicion or accused of committing acts that are taken into account in Part 1 of Article 75 of the Criminal Code RF.
The question of signs of repentance of the criminal is debatable. It is necessary to note that the article uses the word “may” for a reason, that is, in this case the right remains with the body of the investigative committee (or the body of inquiry). This means that if the criminal has repented, and there are subjective conditions for release outlined in Article 75 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the body investigating the case, which may be a court, investigator or interrogator, has the right to refuse to release the criminal.
However, for the possibility of applying active repentance, it is necessary that in the actions of the criminal who committed the act, all conditions or, in exceptional cases, some parts of these conditions are present simultaneously, when for objective reasons we can see that the presence of a certain condition could not exist due to the circumstances of the case.
Legal expert A.V. Polikhovskaya says that in Article 75 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation there is a list of problems and this issue is one of the main ones - “inconsistency between the name of the norm and the content.”
The difference between voluntary renunciation and active repentance
Let's consider the difference between voluntary renunciation of a crime and active repentance.
- Voluntarily giving up illegal actions is permissible when a crime is being prepared and carried out. But only at the moment when the criminal actions did not reach the final stage. Repentance can only follow after a person has already committed a crime and it is no longer possible to voluntarily renounce criminal acts.
- In some cases, voluntary renunciation of a crime can relieve one from criminal punishment, and active repentance does not relieve such responsibility, but will be a circumstance that will mitigate the sentence imposed.
- Active repentance presupposes active actions, and voluntary refusal is possible with both passive and active actions.
- Repentance can be observed after committing an atrocity that occurred through negligence, without malicious intent, but premeditated and illegal. Voluntary refusal occurs in criminal actions that are committed with malicious intentions.
Thus, it should be concluded that punishment can be avoided by stopping oneself from committing illegal actions in time. If a criminal act has been committed, it is always possible to mitigate the punishment by active repentance. And the best thing is to be a law-abiding citizen, thereby protecting yourself and your loved ones from unpleasant moments.
Voluntary refusal to commit a crime: judicial practice
Let's consider an example from judicial practice , namely the Appeal Resolution of the Vologda Regional Court No. 22-2219/2017 dated November 16, 2021 in case No. 22-2219/2017.
Sharapov S.A. found guilty of committing thefts, including illegal entry into premises, and unlawful taking of a car without the purpose of theft under circumstances established by the court.
In the appeal, the convicted Sharapov S.A. indicates that he does not agree with the sentence, considers it too harsh. Refers to the fact that, based on judicial practice by the courts of the Vologda region, according to Article 158, part 2, paragraph “b” of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, if the damage is compensated in full or in part or returned to the victim, then the punishment is imposed less than two years of imprisonment. I do not agree with the qualification of his actions under Article 158 Part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation regarding the theft of a cell phone “...”, which was in the passenger compartment of a car of the brand “...”, because returned the phone to the owner when he arrived at the scene of the crime, thereby voluntarily stopping actions aimed at committing this crime, asks to apply Part 1 of Article 31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. For the second episode, qualified under Article 158 Part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, he asks to apply Part 2 of Article 31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, since the damage has been fully returned. It is noteworthy that the victims did not insist on strict punishment.
The court found that the legal qualification of the actions of Sharapov S.A. matches the description of the criminal acts to which he agreed to the charges. Grounds for the release of Sharapova S.A. no criminal liability is considered. Punishment for Sharapov S.A. appointed in accordance with the requirements of the law, taking into account the deed and all circumstances affecting liability. It corresponds to the social danger of the crimes he has committed and the personality of the perpetrator, the principles of humanism and justice enshrined in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation, and meets the objectives of correcting the convicted person and preventing him from committing new crimes. The court took into account as circumstances mitigating the punishment: full admission of guilt, repentance for the crime, surrender, state of health of S.A. Sharapova. The appellate court does not see any grounds for recognizing other circumstances as mitigating the sentence of the convicted person. The aggravating circumstance is Sharapova S.A. recidivism was recognized. There is no data to consider what was assigned to S.A. Sharapova. punishment, both for each crime individually and for their totality, is not unjust due to its severity. The court does not find any grounds for mitigating the sentence imposed on the convicted person, as raised in the appeal. The arguments of the appeal of the convicted person are that, based on the judicial practice of the courts of the Vologda Region under Article 158, Part 2, Clause “b” of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, if the damage is compensated in full or in part or returned to the victim, then the punishment is imposed less than 2 years of imprisonment, not may serve as a basis for canceling or changing the court decision of the court of first instance, since such judicial acts are not prejudicial in nature and are not the basis for adoption in the case of Sharapov S.A. a different decision than the one made by the court of first instance. In addition, in the Russian Federation, judicial precedent is not a source of law.
Thus, in fact, the appellate court confirmed the correctness of the classification of the crime and the court decision of the first instance court and, in our opinion, rightly refused to apply under the first episode of Part 1 of Article 31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and for the second episode, qualified under Article 158, Part 1 of the Criminal Code RF application of Part 2 of Article 31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
Another similar example could be the Sentence of the Dzerzhinsky District Court of the Novosibirsk Region No. 1-392/2017 of November 15, 2021 in case No. 1-392/2017.
Kokoteev Yu.I. committed an intentional crime in the city of Novosibirsk under the following circumstances. DD.MM.YYYY at about 5 p.m. Kokoteev was in a state of intoxication at house No...., when he saw FULL NAME1 in the hand of an unfamiliar person. cellular telephone "…". At this moment, Kokoteev had a criminal, selfish intent aimed at committing the open theft of a cell phone from FULL NAME1. Being in the same place and at the same time, Kokoteev, realizing his criminal, selfish intent, approached FULL NAME1. and, acting openly, snatched from her hand a cell phone “...” worth 3,000 rubles, in which a SIM card of the cellular operator “...” was installed, on the account of which there were funds in the amount of 50 rubles, thereby openly kidnapping him.
After which, Kokoteev, keeping the stolen property to himself, without responding to the legal demands of FULL NAME1. stop and return the stolen property to her, fled the scene of the crime, causing harm FULL NAME1. material damage in the amount of 3050 rubles. At the court hearing, defendant Kokoteev Yew.I. He admitted partial guilt. He explained to the court that he worked in a taxi. DD.MM.YYYY he brought the client to Sberbank located in house No.…. While he was helping a client, his passport, driver's license and phone were stolen from his car. He came to this place and tried to find the thief. DD.MM.YYYY in the evening, once again he came to this place and went into the cafe. There he began drinking alcohol with unfamiliar men. Then they went outside and began drinking alcohol there. After some time, the victim, FULL NAME1, approached them and stood to the side. As he understood, the victim’s husband drank alcohol with him. He saw FULL NAME1 in his hands a cell phone “...” in a red case. He thought that this phone had previously belonged to him and had been stolen. He decided to get this phone back. He snatched the phone from FULL NAME1’s hand and ran towards the street. ...he doesn’t know why he did this, as he was heavily intoxicated. Running into the courtyard of a house, he stopped and went to his home. Arriving home, he went to bed. Then he realized that he had taken someone else's phone. So he went to the police to return this phone, but was detained.
During the preliminary investigation, Kokoteev gave slightly different testimony. So, in particular, Kokoteev stated that after they sat in the tavern, they went out into the street and began to drink alcohol. He saw FULL NAME1 in his hands a cell phone, she turned on the music on it and listened to it, at that moment he decided to steal this phone from FULL NAME1, snatched it from his hand and ran towards the street. …. He doesn’t know why he did this, since he was heavily intoxicated. Running into the courtyard of a house he couldn’t say which one, he stopped and went to his home. Arriving home, he went to bed.
Having analyzed the defendant’s explanations given by him during the preliminary investigation and at the trial, the court comes to the conclusion that during the preliminary investigation Kokoteev gave truthful testimony, and the court recognizes the testimony of Yu.I. Kokotev as truthful. given by him in court, in terms of indicating the place, time of the incident, the fact that it was he who snatched the mobile phone from the hands of FULL NAME1, with which he ran away. In the remaining part, the testimony of the defendant, given by him at the court hearing, is recognized by the court as untrue and regarded as a way of defending himself against the charges brought against him.
In Kokoteev’s actions, the court does not see a voluntary renunciation of the crime (Article 31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), since Kokoteev did not stop actions directly aimed at committing a crime, but illegally took possession of someone else’s property, fled from the scene of the crime with the stolen property, and had a real opportunity to dispose of the stolen property .
As can be seen from the analysis of the situations presented above, the court in both cases considered the crime completed, and therefore refused to apply s. 31 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.
