Lawyer's character

"Presiding judge, judge: ...the defendant Luo Daying carried an ax and entered the bank with the purpose of robbing. When the victim took out the cash and put it on the counter to handle the deposit business, Luo Daying snatched all the victim's cash of RMB 500,000. Later, Caught red-handed.

This court held that the defendant Luo Daying entered a financial institution with a murder weapon and robbed depositors of a huge amount of funds. His behavior constituted the crime of robbery and recommended the death penalty. complete. "The prosecutor said.

What? Recommend the death penalty! Luo Daying's eyes immediately straightened. Although he had heard from people inside that he might be sentenced to death, he had always had a trace of luck in his heart and hoped that the prosecutor's office would be lenient. Now he can only place his hope on the court. .

"The defendant Luo Daying defended himself," the presiding judge said.

"I...I didn't rob the bank. What I robbed was the woman's money. I didn't rob the bank..." Luo Daying's head was in chaos and her brain went blank.

"Defendant Luo Daying's defender expressed his defense opinion," the presiding judge said.

"Presiding judge, judge: The defender believes that the defendant Luo Daying entered the bank to rob savings customers' funds in a huge amount, and his behavior constituted the crime of robbery. However, the defendant Luo Daying did not use violence during the robbery and it was an attempt. According to the "Criminal Law" In accordance with the basic principle of commensurate crime and punishment, we ask the court to give a lighter punishment and recommend that the defendant Luo Daying be sentenced to fifteen years in prison." Fang Yidao.

"The prosecutor can respond to the defender's defense opinions." The presiding judge felt that it was necessary for both parties to express their defense opinions in depth. The current defense opinions of both parties are too superficial and are not conducive to the collegial panel's review of the case.

"Okay, let's make two comments regarding the defender's defense opinions:

1. This case involves two circumstances: a huge amount of robbery and a bank robbery, and should be severely punished.

Article 263 of the "Criminal Law" stipulates eight circumstances that require severe punishment. Huge amounts of robbery and bank robbery are among the circumstances that require severe punishment. They must be within the legal sentencing range of fixed-term imprisonment of more than ten years, life imprisonment, and death. Severe punishment.

The crime of robbery is a violent property crime with serious social harm. In order to achieve the unity of legal effect and social effect, the death penalty should be applied to achieve the effect of deterring criminals.

2. There is no attempt in the crime of aggravated robbery.

Article 263 of the Criminal Law stipulates that whoever robs public or private property by violence, coercion or other methods shall be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years, and shall also be fined; whoever commits any of the following circumstances shall be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years and a fine; Imprisonment, life imprisonment or death, together with a fine or confiscation of property...

We believe that the crime of robbery is divided into ordinary robbery (that is, a fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years, and a partial fine) and aggravated robbery (that is, there are eight circumstances, and a penalty of not less than ten years of fixed-term imprisonment, life imprisonment, or death penalty, and a fine or confiscation of property).

For the crime of ordinary robbery, the completed crime and the attempted crime should be distinguished based on whether the property was obtained; for the crime of aggravated robbery, there should be no attempted situation.

The eight aggravating circumstances stipulated in Article 263 of the Criminal Law include: (1) Robbery at home; (2) Robbery on public transportation; (3) Robbery of banks or other financial institutions; (3) Robbery of banks or other financial institutions; 4) Multiple robberies or huge amounts of robbery; (5) Robbery resulting in serious injury or death; (6) Robbery by impersonating military and police personnel; (7) Robbery with a gun; (8) Robbery of military supplies or emergency or disaster relief , relief supplies.

The above eight aggravating circumstances include aggravating circumstances and aggravating results. Whether or not the above eight aggravating circumstances are present is the condition for the establishment of an aggravated crime. Therefore, the aggravation of the crime of robbery is only a question of whether it is constituted or not, and there is no distinction between completed and attempted crimes.

In other words, regardless of whether the defendant forcibly and illegally possessed the victim's property, as long as the robbery has statutory aggravating circumstances, it meets the conditions for aggravated punishment, that is, the crime of robbery with aggravated punishment is not attempted.

The defendant in this case, Luo Daying, entered a bank to rob savings customers of a huge amount of money. At the same time, he committed two aggravating circumstances of bank robbery and robbery of a huge amount. He had already succeeded in the robbery and was caught in the process of escaping. His behavior was a completed robbery and should be severely punished. , punishable by death. complete. "The prosecutor said.

What's going on! Why is it still linked to bank robbery? Fang Yi was shocked. Robbery of a bank is a situation with aggravated punishment, which is what ordinary people call a "felon".

"The defender can respond to the prosecutor's opinions." The presiding judge is quite satisfied with the prosecutor's opinions. With such opinions, at least the judgment can have a few more pages.

“In response to the prosecutor’s defense opinions and responses, the defender issued the following defense opinions:

1. Defendant Luo Daying’s behavior does not constitute bank robbery.

According to Article 3 of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Trial of Robbery Cases", "Robbery of a bank or other financial institution" as stipulated in Article 263 (3) of the Criminal Law refers to Robbery of operating funds, securities, and customer funds of banks or other financial institutions emphasizes the funds of banks and other financial institutions, not customers.

Defendant Luo Daying's behavior of entering the bank and snatching funds from customers who were preparing to make deposits does not fall within the 'customers' funds' explained above. The reasons are as follows:

From the original intention of the legislation, the reason why the Criminal Law includes robbery of banks or other financial institutions as a severe punishment is to highlight the crackdown on crimes against banks or other financial institutions and to protect the safety of financial institutions.

At the time of the incident, the victim entered the bank and was preparing to handle savings business at the window. At this time, the cash was still in the hands of the customer and had not entered the bank. The customer and the bank are two independent entities, so the behavior of the defendant Luo Daying should not be regarded as a violation of the law. A bank robbery was committed.

Luo Daying's robbery constituted bank robbery only when the victim's cash had been delivered to bank staff.

The defender believes that the 'customer's funds' in the above explanation should be the customer's funds under the control of a bank or financial institution, not the cash that the savings customer in this case intends to deposit in the bank.

2. The crime of aggravated robbery may include completed or attempted crimes.

The defender believes that the crime of robbery with aggravated punishment still includes completed and attempted situations. According to the "Criminal Law", the crime of robbery infringes upon complex objects, including property rights and personal rights. Whether property is robbed, personal injury is caused to others, or both, it is considered completed; if If no property is taken and no personal injury is caused to others, it should be considered an attempt.

Among the eight aggravating circumstances stipulated in Article 263 of the "Criminal Law", except for the aggravating circumstance of "robbery causing serious injury or death", the other circumstances all involve completed or attempted circumstances, among which robbery is In the event of an attempt, the defendant shall be punished in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law on attempters.

In this case, the defendant Luo Daying did not commit any violence or harm others during the robbery.

Defendant Luo Daying took advantage of the victim's unpreparedness and robbed the lockbox containing cash. On the surface, it appeared that the victim had lost control of the cash in the lockbox. However, for the defendant Luo Daying, he did not escape from the bank business hall. He did not actually control or obtain the cash in the lockbox. Moreover, the defendant was caught on the spot before he ran out of the bank business hall at the time of the incident. Therefore, the defendant Luo Daying's behavior should be considered an attempt.

3. The basic principles of commensurate crime and punishment stipulated in the Criminal Law should be observed in all circumstances.

The eight aggravating circumstances stipulated in Article 263 of the Criminal Law are relative to general circumstances (fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years).

It can be seen from the provisions of the above-mentioned law that when applying this law, the order of severity should be from light to serious, starting with fixed-term imprisonment of more than ten years, then life imprisonment, and finally the death penalty.

Therefore, robbery with eight aggravating circumstances should also follow the basic principle of crime adaptation, and the applicable sentence should be selected according to the specific circumstances of the case. Whether the robbery caused personal injury or death to others and whether it constituted a completed crime should be fully considered when sentencing.

In this case, the defendant Luo Daying carried an ax to rob. Although he should be punished as robbery and there are circumstances that aggravate the punishment (the amount of robbery was huge), the defendant did not use violence or threaten violence from beginning to end, and did not cause any physical harm to others. Injury is an attempted crime. According to the provisions of Article 23 of the Criminal Law, attempted offenders may be given a lighter or reduced punishment than accomplished offenders.

In summary, we recommend that defendant Luo Daying be sentenced to fifteen years in prison. The collegial panel is requested to adopt the defender's opinion. complete. "Fang Yi said.

…

After the trial, the presiding judge did not pronounce the verdict in court, and Fang Yi and Zhou Ying returned to the law firm.

"Lawyer Fang, you are so awesome. When the prosecutor brought up Luo Daying's 'bank robbery' in court, I was immediately confused. I didn't expect you to react immediately." Zhou Ying said with admiration.

"When we discussed the case before, did you not fully read the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in the Trial of Robbery Cases"?" Fang Yi said with a smile.

"Well, I used that one to read that one, and I really didn't think much about it." Zhou Ying said with a smile.

"Lawyers' trial reactions are trained in long-term trials. Remember, don't panic when the prosecutor brings up situations that you are not aware of in the future. Once you get confused, the defense effect in the trial will definitely not be better." Fang Yi said.

"What should we do?" Zhou Ying asked doubtfully.

"It depends on local conditions and emotions!" Fang Yi said with a mysterious smile.

"This is too difficult!" Zhou Ying said with a bitter face.

"Some things can only be understood but not expressed in words. You have to constantly comprehend and experience them during the trial. Even if I tell you now, you will be confused and forget it when the time comes.

This is just like marching and fighting. No matter how good the things taught in school are, they are just words on paper. It is useless if you have not been on the battlefield (have not been in court). The situation on the battlefield (court trial) is changing rapidly. When the time comes, no one can help you, you can only rely on yourself. . Understand! "Fang Yi said.

"Oh, I understand, you just have to hone yourself in actual combat and realize it yourself, right!" Zhou Ying nodded.

"Yes! But mental quality comes first. If you don't have good mental quality and can't handle the pressure, you won't be able to handle big or serious cases, and of course you won't be able to make big money." Fang Yi said with a smile.

Zhou Ying nodded.

"Okay, prepare the materials for Sun Dalin's kidnapping case and make more preparations before the trial. Print out all the legal provisions and judicial interpretations involved and bring them with you." Fang Yi said.

"Okay." Zhou Ying agreed and went out.

During this period, Fang Yi has been busy with three criminal cases for legal aid. Fang Yi only received a few simple interviews, and his income dropped sharply. The purpose of handling cases is to make money and improve life. The number of legal aid cases is increasing. If you only handle a few cases, you will definitely not make money. This is a very real problem, which also makes him depressed.

Just when he was thinking wildly, the door opened and Wan Kefa walked in.

"Good fellow, the old monk seems to be in trance, what are you thinking about?" Wan Kefa said with a smile.

"It's nothing, I'm thinking about how to take advantage of your good luck and make more money." Fang Yi said with a smile.

"Do you feel that the cases you have been involved in have delayed your ability to make money?" Wan Kefa said.

"No, absolutely not. Who is spreading rumors? I severely condemn them." Fang Yi pretended to be serious.

"Xiao Fang, you have learned badly from Lao Huang and Ma Yi! You can tell lies without blushing." Wan Kefa curled his lips and said, "Give you a chance to make atonement for your sins."

"You just need to make meritorious service to atone for your sins! Lao Wan, you can't accuse me unjustly." Fang Yi argued. He didn't know what the fat old man was planning.

"Don't talk nonsense. Qian Wen has resigned. See if there is a suitable lawyer to take over Qian Wen's job." Wan Kefa said.

Since Qian Wen's depression, Wankefa had the idea of ​​recruiting lawyers, but could not find a suitable lawyer, so the team assigned Qian Wen's legal aid case to other lawyers in the team, but this was only a stopgap measure. , cannot last long.

Lawyers don't want fat jobs. It's normal not to catch a cold when it comes to legal aid, which is a tasteless and useless thing that would be a pity to throw away. As time goes by, everyone will definitely have opinions. Therefore, Wanke Law recommends that everyone make internal recommendations to solve the problem of legal aid lawyers.

"Only legal aid cases?" Fang Yi asked.

"The main focus is on legal aid. As long as the legal aid case is not delayed, you can do other cases without restrictions." Wan Kefa said.

"I'll take a look and see if there's a suitable recommendation for you." Fang Yi said.

A few days later, Luo Daying's case was sentenced, and Fang Yi went to the Intermediate Court to receive the criminal verdict.

The Intermediate Court held that the defendant Luo Daying carried a murder weapon and robbed other people's property in a huge amount, and his behavior constituted the crime of robbery. The charges charged by the public prosecution agency are found guilty and should be confirmed.

Defender Fang Yi's defense opinion regarding attempted crime is not accepted because the defendant Luo Daying was caught while escaping after robbing the victim's money, and his criminal act has been completed, so this defense opinion will not be adopted. In accordance with the provisions of Article 267, Paragraph 2, and Article 263, Item (4) of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, the verdict is as follows:

1. Defendant Luo Daying was convicted of robbery and sentenced to death, deprived of political rights for life, and confiscated all personal property.

2. The murder weapon, an ax, was confiscated and destroyed in accordance with the law.