Temat: Empirical research - Katalog OPAC zbiorów

Skocz do pozycji: 1.

Tytuł:: Podstawowe założenia badań empirycznych w prawoznawstwie - próba konfrontacji
Autorzy:: Kotowski, Artur
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1788228.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2019-07-22
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: badania empiryczne
filozofia analityczna
prawoznawstwo
empirical research
analytic philosophy
jurisprudence
Opis:: The paper is a critical analysis of fundamental assumptions for the empirical research methodology in the jurisprudence field. It is aimed to compare the profile of empirical methodology with jurisprudence-dominant analytic philosophy. This is archived through a) examining the basic profile of the positivist attitude of a researcher along with assumptions integrating empiricism, which derives from the positivist methodology, into different philosophies of the law which specifically appeal to the naturalism of the legal phenomenon; next b) detailing characteristic features of empirical methods which take jurisprudence specifics into account; and finally c) coming to a set of conclusions concerning the success of research conducted this way in the jurisprudence field.
Źródło:: Studia Prawnicze; 2017, 2 (210); 87-114
0039-3312
2719-4302
Pojawia się w:: Studia Prawnicze
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 2.

Tytuł:: Odstraszające oddziaływanie kary na sprawcę przestępstwa w świetle badań empirycznych
Deterrent Effect of Punishment on the Offender (a Review of Empirical Research)
Autorzy:: Szamota-Saeki, Barbara
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/699090.pdf
Data publikacji:: 1995
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: kara
sprawca przestępstwa
badania empiryczne
punishment
criminal offender
empirical research
Opis:: The number of studies on specific deterrence is not large. Some data on this subject can be found in other studies aimed e.g. at evalution of effectiveness of diffrent penal measures, or analysis of criminal careers. One of the reasons of this lack of interest in specific deterrence is a belief, rather common today and particularly marked in the 1960s, that punishment not only fails to deter the convicted person from futher offenses but – quite the contrary - increases the probability of his futher criminal carrer. Another reason is probably the great difficulty in distinguishing for research purposes of the impact of specific deterrence from the other effects of punishment. Unfortunately, a statement made by J. Gibbs over twenty years ago still remains valid: there is no theory of specific deterrence, and the hypotheses concerning specific deterrence are vague and difficult to verify empirically. During the last twenty years, there was a progress in the methodology of research into specific deterrence. New success criteria were introduced into the assessment of deterrent effect of punishment, and the method of random field experiment was used. Researchers started to compare the effect of punishment with the effects of escaning punishment, instead of limiting themselves to comparisons of relative effectiveness of some penalties as opposed to some other ones. The progress was less marked in the formation of the theory of specific deterrence. It consists in attempts, on the one hand, at a new conceptualization of the problem of deterrence, and on the other hand, at integrating the deterrence hypothesis with other theoretical approaches. The paper consists of seven parts. The Introduction (I) contains analysis of the notion of specific deterrence, the criteria to distinguish between specific and general deterrence, tvpes of deterrence. Also discussed have the recent attempts at a new conceptualization of tne problem of deterrence through inclusion into that notion of not only the “direct costs of legal sanctions” but also “indirect costs”, or through the use of another criterion to distinguish between specific and general deterrence. Chapter II contains a brief discussion of early studies on specific deterrence; the findings have been discussed and numerous methodological flaws pointed out. The conclusion from those studies (that severe penalties involve a higher recidivism rate than lenient penalties) was generally seen as a prove that punishment has no specific deterrent effect on the futher behaviour of convicted persons. This conclusion was unjustified, though. And that for several reasons. The discussed studies often failed to distinguish between the mechanism of deterrence and the other effects of punishment. They also failed to solve the problem of selection bias in sentencing where specific types of penalties are imposed on specific categories of offenders; the difference between such groups of convicted persons is that even before the imposition of penalty, the probability of their relapse into crime was different. The studies examined but a marginal effectiveness of some penalties as compared to some other ones. What they overlooked, instead, was that the growth in recidivism rate cannot be estimated which would have taken place were no criminal penalties at all imposed on offenders. Chapter III discusses the findings of studies which tested two opposing hypotheses; i.e. that punishment either deters offenders (deterrence hypothesis) or amplifies offendling (amplification hypothesis). Both the conception of deterrence and that of labeling involve too one-sided and simplified an approach to the impact of punishment on the further conduct of offenders as they ignore the possibility of effects other than the anticipated ones. This was reflected in these studies in which the researches posed instead of posing questions in the categories of “whether” (does punishment deter? does pinishment amplify affending?), instead of trying to define the conditions of emergence of each of those two effects. Analyzed in few studies only were mediating psycho-social processes between punisment and the punished pefsons’ further conduct. The findings of different studies are often inconsistent. Some seem to confirm the amplification hypothesis although researchers sometimes stress that this effect is not stable Other findings point to the effect of deterrence. Still other studies showed that: punishment seems do not influence a pefson’s further criminal career. Finally, some of the latest findings also indicate the possibility of amplifijing offending under some conditions and of deterring effect on offending - under some other circumstances. Chapter IV discusses the implications of the criminal careers approach for methodology of studies on specific deterrence. What is particularly worthy of attention here is: 1) departure from the use of a sole success criterion in the evaluation of deterrent effect of punishment, and an attempt at grasping the impact of punishment on different dimensions of criminality such as the length of criminal career or fraquency of offenses; 2) investigation of the impact of punishment at different stages of a person’s criminal career. The success criterion where success means a person’s abstention from further offenses is replaced with the before and after comparison criterion where the intensity of a person’s criminal career before and after punishment is compared; this replacement is of a great importance in studies of effectiveness of penal measures imposed on chronic offnders. As suggested by the findings, certain penalties may in cessation of delinquency at the initial stage of the criminal career (on the occasion of the first and possibly also the second contact with the police). At further stages of that career, a decrease in the intensity of delinquency of the persons convicted is possible. Chapter V discusses attempts at including the hypothesis of specific deterrence into the economic model of delinquent behawior, and studies carried out by economists. According to some economists, specific deterrence can be included into the theory of rational choice provided it is treated as a special case of general deterrence. In tlis approach, the experience of a sanction becomes a factor influencing the anticipated sanctions. Chapter VI is devoted to discussion of the results of a series of rondom field experiments conducted in selected cities of the United States. The purpose was to evaluate the effectiveness of arrest as compared to other reactions to violence against a spouse (nearly all victims in the study were women). The obtained results were not uniform: in some experiments, deterrent effect of arrest was found out, while the rest showed an amplifying effect of arrest on the arrested person’s further violence against his spouse. The authors explain this divergence of results with a different impact of arrest on different types of persons. Thus the results suggest that arrest has a deterrent effect on permanently employed suspects; instead, suspects without a regular job tended to use violence more often after the arrest incident. The last Chapter (VII) recapitulates the findings. They show that it was a premature decision to reject the hyphothesis of specific deterrence. Punishment has a different impact on different persons: in some situations it results in amplication of offending; in some other ones, it deters a person from further offenses; and in still other situations it seems not to have any effect at all on furter offending. The findings point to a great importance in this respect of the first contacts with the law enforcement agencies. Moreover, the differentiated effect of punishment seems to depend on the offender’s age, sex, and attitude towards risk, and also on his permanent employment. It should be stressed that many studies use a broader definition of punishment, not limited to the penalties imposed by court. Some researchers treat even a person’s contact with the police as punishment; others believe that this function is performed by arrest. These different working definitions of punishment make it difficult to interpret the findings that relate to absolute deterrence, that is assessment of the effects of imposing punishment as compared to those of escaping punishment. Nearly all studies dealt with recidivism and, first and foremost, the effectiveness of punishment in reducing a person’s further delinquency. To a slight extent only did they try to define the meaning of punishment for those punished, their subjective estimations of probability and severity of punishment. For this reason, interpretation of the findings in the categories of stating whether punishment has a deterrent effect is not always justified.
Źródło:: Archiwum Kryminologii; 1995, XXI; 7-39
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:: Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 3.

Tytuł:: Polskie sądy rodzinne w świetle badań empirycznych
Polish Family Courts in the Light of Empirical Research
Autorzy:: Strzembosz, Adam
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/962276.pdf
Data publikacji:: 1984
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: sąd rodzinny
badania empiryczne
Polska
family courts
empirical research
alimony
family
jurisdiction
judge
Opis:: 1. The idea of family jurisdiction is not new, yet it continues to raise animated discussion and controversy. Family courts which exist in many countries have miscellaneous and frequently rather narrow competence. Elsewhere, experiments have been made with family courts for many years now, consisting in taking observations of the works of a few family courts, the traditional orgnization of jurisdiction maintained in the entire country. The family jurisdiction, enforced in Poland on January 1st, 1978, was introduced in the entire territory, the competence of family courts outlined most broadly: all cases directly connected with family relations (affiliation of a child, alimony, nullification and dissolution of a marriage, adoption, limitation, suspension and deprivation of parental authority, institution of legal protection, etc.), cases connected with penal acts committed by juveniles, cases of compulsory treatment of alcoholics in closed hospitals, and offences against family, guardianship, and the youth, fell under competence of family courts. Family courts which are departments of district courts, have assembled nearly half of the cases coming in a district court. At the same time, cases have been divided between the judges basing on the territorial principle: every judge hears all kinds of cases coming in from the territory he has been assigned. This way, all cases essentially connected with the functioning of a given family were always to be judged by the same judge. The broad competence of a family judge and the fact that he heard all cases concerning the members of a given family was to create conditions in which all problems appearing within that family would be treated on a broad basis in every case, to ensure that each particular pronouncement concerning that family be compact and complementary, to guarantee the correctness of decisions owing to the knowledge of the whole of conflicts which occur in that family, and to make preventive activities broader and deeper. The creation of family courts caused the liquidation of juvenile courts, all their cases having passed to the family courts, as well as the transference of a considerable part of cases heard before by civil courts and a small number of cases from criminal courts. Such a far-reaching reform of organization of common jurisdiction has justified the study of the effects of introduction of family courts, the more so as juvenile courts played an important part in the system of preventive measures against delinquency and other forms of social maladjustment. Therefore, it was the aim of the study to find out if family courts realize their function in practice, and what are the factors that determine difficulties or irregularities in case the courts fail totally or partially to fulfill their object. The study embraced various sources of information about the functioning of family courts, i.e., first of all, statistical data on the jurisdiction in cases which now come within the scope of family courts from two periods: before and after they had been transferred to the family courts (years 1976-1977 and 1978-1981). Another extremely important source of information about the functioning of family courts was the analysis of cases of particular kind judged by juvenile, civil, and criminal couits, and then by family courts. Among the cases which provided a particularly great amount of information as to the way in which family courts fulfilled the goal they were planned to fulfill, were divorce suits, limitation of parental authority, penal acts of juveniles, and criminal cases of offences against family, guardianship, and the youth. Such cases require well-prepared materials before they are examined, comprehensive study of particular legal problems from the point of view of the interest of the family, first of all children that are brought up in it, and finally (apart from divorce suits) active execution of the sentence, as the method of execution determines the results of the entire preceding activity of the court. A detailed study was made of a standard sample of cases now investigated by 8 family courts - small, medium, and large, each of the 4 family courts created on January 1st, 1978, matched with one of the 4 family courts which had been functioning before that day as experimental courts. In this way comparison could have been made between the functioning of new family courts and those which had been working for some years to find out if the lenght of the period of work of the family court contributed to eliminating of various mistakes and dificiencies resulting from lack of experience during the first years of work of the family court. The standard of work of the "new" family courts emerging from the analysis of cases was also compared with that of juvenile courts, civil courts, and criminal courts which had been departments of the same district courts, by way of analysis of the same kind of cases judged before the reform of jurisdiction. This comparison was to provide information about changes which took place in preliminary proceedings, setencing, and execution of sentences, after family courts had taken over the cases which had been investigated before by other departments of district courts. Another source of information was the examination on the spot of the conditions of work of the 8 family courts the files of which had been analysed, including their staff, the system of social probation officers, the number of different duties imposed, and the power to execute decicions. Finally, the opinion on family courts was asked of family judges themselves, of professional probation officers of these courts, and of solicitors, whose experience in appearing before different courts in cases of the same kind seemed particularly valuable. A questionnaire examination also included the family judges who had judged in juvenile, civil, and criminal courts before the jurisdiction reform, so as to define their attitudes and opinions as regards various problems of family life. The aim of the questionnaire was to find out any differences between the attitudes of former juvenile court judges in comparison with other judges working subsequently in family courts. 2. The analysis of statistical data concerning the 6-year period (including 4 years after family jurisdiction had been introduced) did not reveal any symptomatic difference which could be related to the creation of family courts. As regards divorce suits, for instance, neither the percentage of cases discontinued due to the reconciliation of the parties increased, not that of dismissed cases; in cases concerning parental authority, the structure of decisions did not change; in cases of penal acts committed by juveniles but a small increase of less radical sentences was noticed; finally, as regards cases of offences against family, guardianship, and the youth, the only change was a slight reduction of the number of sentences to the penalty of deprivation of liberty without conditional suspension of execution in favour of limitation of parental authority. The results obtained through a detailed analysis of court files of cases formerly heard by juvenile, civil, and criminal courts were much the same as regards the contents of issued decisions. Nevertheless, in some spheres of activity of family courts some favourable changes occurred; unfortunately they were accompanied by a considerable regress in other spheres. In particular, family courts investigated the situation of children of divorcing parents more precisely than the civil courts, but on the other hand they neglected material problems, less frequently adjudging alimony amounting to a sum higher than demanded, less frequently deciding ex officio as to the means of using a common appartment by the divorced parties and adjudging eviction from the appartment of the party who particularly grossly disturbed the family peace. In all cases where the court's decision should be properly executed by the family court machine, a considerable deterioration of the way of execution took place. This resulted both from the lack of adequate interest in this problem on the part of family judges who were engaged mostly in jurisdiction, and from remissness of professional probation officers who were also burdened with many other tasks and whose work was supervised by family judges but in a minimal degree. In spite of their contact with many kinds of cases, family judges showed little interest in prevention. It was interesting to find out that also the former juvenile judges who had been accustomed to give a lot of attention to various preventive activities, now did not differ by any means in this respect from the former civil and criminal judges. Also the functioning of the "old" family courts was by no means superior to that of the "new” ones, and it was even inferior in some spheres - therefore, the standard of work of the courts was determined by other factors and not by the lack of experience. The analysis of decisions from the point of view of complexity of their approach to the whole of the problems existing within a given family gave no evidence as to any differences between decisions in the same kinds of cases issued by family courts on the one hand, and juvenile, civil, and criminal courts on the other. Also the anticipation that decisions of family courts would be more compact and complementary to each other if several different cases of members of the same family would be heard by the same court, came true but to a minimal extent. Firstly, the percentage of families towards which at least 2 decisions had been issued by a family court during its period of existence was considerably low, amounting to 25 per cent of families ever included in any legal proceedings. Even in the case of those family courts which had been functioning for 7 years, the percentage in question was not high, amounting to 32 per cent. Secondly, in spite of the principle of territorial division of cases among the judges, only in half of cases, all suits concerning a given family were heard by the same judge. Thirdly, due to the nature of a considerable number of cases, the material gathered for them during the proceedings was of no importance as regards the way of examination and the essence of decision issued in the next case (this concerns first of all suits for alimony). Eventually, only in every seventh case both the same judge had heard the former case as well as the present one, and in the former case material had been gathered which was valuable for the better knowledge of the family and the more relevant judgement. It should also be mentioned that in the case of many of the decisions, there was considerable probability that the verdict sentences would have been similar, had they been adjudged by another judge of the same court, or of civil or criminal court. Therefore, it was impossible to ascertain that the creation of family courts had considerably contributed to a greater complexity, compactness, and complementariness of judgements. The opinions on the functioning of family courts gathered from judges, probation officers, and solicitors have confirmed a number of remarks made during the analysis of court files and the direct examination of the conditions of work of the selected family courts. In spite of the fact that the very idea of creating family courts has been estimated favourably by the majority of the examined persons (62 per cent), a considerable part of them pointed to the following defects: too wide range of tasks of family courts, the resulting overwork which hindered adequate preventive activities, the domination of jurisdiction as compared with other tasks of the family court. One third of the respondents could not see any advantage in the creation of family courts. Half of them was of opinion that the introduction of family courts failed to increase the protection of children and the youth against demoralization (this was most frequently the opinion of the family judges themselves). The second questionnaire, concerning opinions and attitudes of family judges, revealed the statements of the former juvenile judges concerning family and its problems to be more complete and definite as compared with statements of the former civil and criminal judges, and to take into consideration more frequently the psychological, pedagogical, social in its broadest sense, and even medical, aspects of these problems. One should, however, bear in mind that, as revealed by the analysis of files, no evidence was found of better work of the former juvenile judges as compared with other family judges. In the final part of the present article an attempt was made to draw conclusions from the results of the study. Having discussed different possible variants of changing the competence of family courts, a definite model of a family court was suggested, characterized by a different internal structure, narrowed competence and a better defined position in the system of prevention of social maladjustment of children and the youth.
Źródło:: Archiwum Kryminologii; 1984, XI; 167-225
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:: Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 4.

Tytuł:: Opinie diagnostyczne w sprawach nieletnich
Autorzy:: Ostaszewski, Paweł
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/26917622.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2013
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: biegły
badania aktowe
badania empiryczne
nieletni
legal expert
act researches
empirical research
juvenile
Opis:: Dowód z opinii diagnostycznych wydawanych przez rodzinne ośrodki diagnostycznokonsultacyjne jest źródłem bardzo ważnych i rzetelnych informacji dla sędziów orzekających w szeroko rozumianych sprawach dotyczących rodzin i ich członków. Analiza tych opinii była już podejmowana w opracowaniach dotyczących spraw rozwodowych i innych spraw rodzinnych. Celowe było zbadanie roli takich opinii także w sprawach nieletnich, stanowiących kolejną grupę spraw rozpatrywanych przez sądy rodzinne. Specyfika spraw nieletnich daje możliwość szerszego spojrzenia na problematykę diagnozowania osób stających przed sądami rodzinnymi. Pojawiają się w nich bowiem także opinie mające podobny cel i podobną formę jak opinie RODK, ale wydane przez inne organy (biegłych psychologów, biegłych psychiatrów, schroniska dla nieletnich).
Źródło:: Biuletyn Kryminologiczny; 2013, 20; 21-50
2084-5375
Pojawia się w:: Biuletyn Kryminologiczny
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 5.

Tytuł:: Izolacja spotęgowana – kilka pytań na temat oddziałów dla tzw. więźniów niebezpiecznych
Isolation Enhanced: Some Questions on Units for the So-Called Dangerous Inmates
Autorzy:: Lasocik, Zbigniew
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/698754.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2008
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: więźniowie niebezpieczni
oddziały
badania empiryczne
izolacja spotęgowana
system penitencjarny
dangerous prisoners
“N” unit
empirical research
penitentiary system
Źródło:: Archiwum Kryminologii; 2008, XXIX-XXX; 703-718
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:: Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 6.

Tytuł:: Wpływ prawa karnego na przekonania moralne społeczeństwa w świetle wybranych badań empirycznych
Influence of Penal Law on Moral Beliefs of the Society in the Light of Selected Empirical Research
Autorzy:: Szamota-Saeki, Barbara
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/698862.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2008
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: prawo karne
moralność społeczeństwa
badania empiryczne
przestępstwo
kara
penal law
morality of society
offence
punishment
empirical research
Źródło:: Archiwum Kryminologii; 2008, XXIX-XXX; 203-214
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:: Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 7.

Tytuł:: Sprawcy i kara. Skazani w PRL na karę konfiskaty mienia
Autorzy:: Rzeplińska, Irena
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1788428.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2021-07-19
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: polityka kryminalna
system prawny Polskiej Rzeczypospolitej Ludowej
badania empiryczne
kara konfiskaty mienia
Confiscation of property
crime policy
legal system of the Polish People's Republic
empirical research
Opis:: Kara konfiskaty mienia jest jedną z najstarszych kar kryminalnych – pozbawia sprawcę przestępstwa całego, będącego jego własnością majątku. Stosowana w systemach prawnych państw totalitarnych: Niemiec hitlerowskich, Rosji Radzieckiej i ZSRR, państw demokracji ludowej, w tym PRL. W artykule prezentuję wyniki badań kryminologicznych nad sprawcami przestępstw skazanymi w latach 80. XX w. w Polsce na karę konfiskaty mienia. Analizuję celowość tak bezwzględnej represji ekonomicznej w określonym ustroju politycznym i gospodarczym.
Punishment of confiscation of estate, property, possessions - one of the oldest sanctions applied for committing crimes occurred. Punishment was applied in criminal justice systems of totalitarian states: Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia, in socialistic countries also. In article, I present criminological research of persons convicted on punishment of confiscation in 80. of XX century in Poland. I analyse purpose of this punishment in specific political and economic system – socialistic system in Poland at 80. of XX c.
Źródło:: Biuletyn Kryminologiczny; 2017, 24; 73-78
2084-5375
Pojawia się w:: Biuletyn Kryminologiczny
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 8.

Tytuł:: Sądowa praktyka orzecznicza w zakresie stosowania środka karnego podania wyroku do publicznej wiadomości w prawie karnym sensu stricto
Autorzy:: Daniluk, Paweł
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1788157.pdf
Data publikacji:: 2020-06-30
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: making the judgment public
criminal law in the strict sense
empirical research
judicial practice
podanie wyroku do publicznej wiadomości
prawo karne sensu stricto
badania empiryczne
sądowa praktyka orzecznicza
Opis:: Niniejsze opracowanie ma na celu zaprezentowanie badań empirycznych, przeprowadzonych nad sądową praktyką orzeczniczą w zakresie stosowania środka karnego, jakim jest podanie wyroku do publicznej wiadomości. Przy czym prezentacja ta ograniczona jest do prawa karnego sensu stricto. Wynika to z tego, że w zgromadzonych do badań wyrokach wymierzano ów środek karny tylko za przestępstwa powszechne. Analizą objęto 150 prawomocnych i nieprawomocnych wyroków sądów pierwszej instancji (sądów rejonowych i sądów okręgowych), w których orzeczono podanie wyroku do publicznej wiadomości.Wyroki te pozyskano z prowadzonego przez Ministerstwo Sprawiedliwości Portalu Orzeczeń Sądów Powszechnych.
The purpose of this study is to present empirical research on judicial practice in the field of applying a criminal measure, which is to make a judgment public. This presentation is limited to criminal law in the strict sense. This is due to the fact that in the judgments collected for examination, this criminal measure was imposed only for common crimes. The analysis covered 150 final and invalid judgments of first instance courts (district and regional courts), in which the decision was made public. These judgments were obtained from the Judicial Portal of Common Courts operated by the Ministry of Justice.
Źródło:: Studia Prawnicze; 2020, 1(221); 91-121
0039-3312
2719-4302
Pojawia się w:: Studia Prawnicze
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Skocz do pozycji: 9.

Tytuł:: Merytoryczne przesłanki orzekania kar i innych środków wobec wielokrotnych recydywistów
Penalties and other measures applied towards multiple recidivists
Autorzy:: Janiszewski, Bogusław
Powiązania:: https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/699228.pdf
Data publikacji:: 1986
Wydawca:: Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
Tematy:: recydywa
wielokrotny recydywista
kara
kodeks karny
środki karne
polityka karna
wymiar kary
kara pozbawienia wolności
orzecznictwo
badania empiryczne
statystyki sądowe
recidivism
multiple recidivists
punishment
penal code
penal measures
criminal policy
sentence
imprisonment
case law
empirical research
court statistics
Opis:: The aims of the present study have been: 1) to ascertain the actual conditions of the courts' decisions applying penalties and other measures towards multiple recidivists; 2) to determine the present penal policy towards this category of convicted persons; 3) to compare this policy with the assumptions included in the Penal Code in force. Punishment imposed upon multiple recidivists is regulated by the provisions of Art. 60, para. 2 and 3 Art. 61 of the Penal Code. Their formulation is as follows: on a perpetrator sentenced twice in the conditions specified in para. 1 (special basic recidivism), who has served altogether at leat one year of deprivation of liberty and in the period of 5 years after the serving of the last penalty commits again an intentional offence with the purpose of obtaining a material benefit or of a hooligan character, similar to at least one of the previously committed offencęs, the court shall impose a penalty within the limits of from three times the lowest sanction, but not less than 2 years, up to the highest statutory sanction increased by one half, and if the highest statutory sanction is not higher than 3 years: up to 5 years deprivation of liberty. The increase of the lowest statutory sanction provided in para. 1 or 2 shall not apply, when the offence is a serious offence; in this case the court shall consider the commission of the offence in the conditions specified in para 1 or 2 as a circumstance increasing the penalty. In particularly justified cases when even the lowest penalty imposed on the basis of Art. 60. paras 1 or 2 would be incommeasurably Severe by reason of the motives for the action of the perpetrator, his traits and personal conditions as well as his way of life before the commission and his behaviour after the perpetration of the offence, the court when imposing the penalty may refrain from applying the rules specified in Art. 60. paras 1 or 2; in these cases the court shall take into consideration the commission of the offence in the conditions specified in Art. 60, para 1or 2 as circumstances influencing increasing the penalty. With regard to a perpetrator sentenced in the conditions specified in Art. 60, para. 2 he court shall adjudge protective supervision; if adjudging this supervision is not sufficient to prevent recidivism, the court shall adjudge .the commitment of the sentenced person to a social readaptation centre. (Art. 62, para. 2). The present work has been based on the author's own research and to a minimum extent only on the analysis of the national statistical data. The point of departure for the study of the actual conditions of the courts decisions were the conditions specified in the Penal Code now in force. The conditions specified in Art. 61 of the Penal Code and related to the offender only have been assumed to form the ratio legis of special recidivism in the Polish penal legislation. If, however, when aplying this provision, the courts prefer the conditions related to the most recent act of the offender, this mignt be an indication of their different attitude towards the aim of punishment in the case of the discussed category of offenders. The existence of such divergences between the conditions of application of Art 61 of the Penal Code as included in the law on the one hand, and those applied by the courts on the other hand has been one of the hypotheses verified in the present study. The study has been based on the examination of court records. All the accessible records of criminal cases (230) have been included in it, in which Sentences were passed with regard to multiple recidivists (under Art 60. para. 2 and Art. 61 in connection with Art. 60, para. 2 of the Penal Code) in the District Court of the city of Poznań in the years 1975-1981. The question arised whether this could be treated as an equivalent to a random sample of the national population of convicted multiple recidivists. As shown by a comparison of distributions in question are highly convergent. A questionnaire to investigate the ourt records consisted of 41 questions concerning the convicted recidivist, his previous offences and criminal record, his last offence and the content of the last sentence. The impact of a number of variables on the application of Art. 61 of the Penal Code, on the length of the prison sentence and on the decision of commitment to a social readaptation centre has been analysed in succession. Conclusions from the study are as follows: 1. In the application of Art.61 of the Penal Code ,the predominating part is played by the conditions connected with the degree of socil danger of the act and with its legal label. The conditions connected with the person of the perpetrator seem to have a much smaller effect. The reason of this state of affairs may be seeked in the fact that the court is obligated by Art. 60, para.2 of the Penal Code to impose long-term penalties of deprivation or liberty regardless of the degree of social danger (seriousness) of the offence which may be trivial in particular cases. Therefore, it is not to be wondered at that in these cases the courts apply Art. 61 of the Penal Code so as to impose a lower or more lenient penalty in order to make it commeasurable with the offence. The following conditions have been found to exert the greatest influence on the length of sentences to deprivation of liberty under Art. 60, para. 2: firstly, the legal appraisal of the offence and the related content of the instructions for meting out punishment specified in Art. 60, para. 2 of the Penal Code, and secondly, the degree of social danger of the offence. The character of the offence and the appraisal of its social danger influence the sentence too, including the type of penalty, when Art. 61 of the Penal Code is applied by the court. This is probably a further result of following the same conditions already when deciding on the application of Art. 61 of the Penal Code. When adjudging the commitment of convicted persons to a social readaptation centre, the courst were guided by the conditions connected with intense symptoms of demoralization of these persons and with a previous application of various penal measures towards them; thus the conditions were formally the same as those to be found in the Penal Code. At the same time, conditions connected with the recently committed offence were left out of account here. One should be particularly careful when interpreting the findings in this case aS the decisions in question may be conditioned by the courts' various attitudes towards the practical functioning of the centers, and by different purposes of their adjudgement in definite cases. The length of the perod for which commitment to a social readaptation centre was adjudged has appeared to increase with the length of the sentence to deprivation of libety. Admittedly, outright conclusions as to the need for amendments of the provisions of the Penal Code in its part concerning recidivists do not follow immediately from the findings of the present study. These findings have. however, demonstrated the degree to which the instructions for meting out, punishment specified in Art. 60, para. 2 of the Penal Code sever the relation between the offence and punishment, as well as the fact that the corrective function of punishment imposed upon multiple recidivists - officially assumed by the legislator-has a fictious character in practice. In consequence, Art. 61 of the Penal Code is used in discord with its purpose; it is applied to adjust the adjudicated punishment to the seriousness of the offence committed.
Źródło:: Archiwum Kryminologii; 1986, XIII; 109-139
0066-6890
2719-4280
Pojawia się w:: Archiwum Kryminologii
Dostawca treści:: Biblioteka Nauki

Artykuł

Zmień widok

na półce

Informacja

Wyszukujesz frazę "Empirical research" wg kryterium: Temat

Źródło danych

Dostawca treści

Kolekcja

Rok wydania

Wydawca

Temat

Autor

Typ dokumentu

Język