Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "Sentence of imprisonment" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
    Wyświetlanie 1-5 z 5
    Tytuł:
    A Gloss for the Judgement of the Supreme Court of 22 June 2017, File Ref. No. Iv Kk 189/17
    Autorzy:
    Joachimiak, Sławomir
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/1803117.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2019-10-25
    Wydawca:
    Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II. Towarzystwo Naukowe KUL
    Tematy:
    expungement
    conditional suspension of penalty
    imprisonment
    concurrent sentence
    cumulative penalty
    Opis:
    In this gloss, the author offers a mostly favourable commentary on the content of the judgement of the Supreme Court of 22 June 2017, file ref. no. IV KK 189/17, which provides a backdrop for a discussion of the recent legislative changes made to Article 76 of the Criminal Code that formed the basis for the said judicial decision. The relationship between this provision and Article 108 of the Code is discussed in the context of the amendments, the doctrine and case law. The article also addresses the possibility of including a conditionally suspended custodial sentence in a concurrent sentence after the probation period is over and the expiry of the period referred to in Article 75 § 4 of the Criminal Code.
    Źródło:
    Roczniki Nauk Prawnych; 2019, 28, 1; 167-176
    1507-7896
    2544-5227
    Pojawia się w:
    Roczniki Nauk Prawnych
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Zakład karny i wykonanie kary pozbawienia wolności w opinii społeczności lokalnej
    Prison and Imprisonment in the Opinion of Local Community
    Autorzy:
    Mościskier, Andrzej
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/699182.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    1984
    Wydawca:
    Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Nauk Prawnych PAN
    Tematy:
    zakład karny
    wykonanie kary
    kara
    pozbawienie wolności
    opinia społeczna
    społeczność lokalna
    penitentiary
    execution of a sentence
    imprisonment
    public opinion
    local community
    Opis:
    Basically, the study concers three  problems. Firstly, an attempt was made to explain the mechanism which led to the results obtained by other authors. They found a supposedly most rigorous attitude of the Polish society towards law breakers, which was to become manifest in the demands for relentless and severe punishment of such persons. This highly rigorous attitude has been confirmed in the present study too, yet only in answers to questions drawn up as generally as those put by the mentioned authors. As the level of abstractness of the questions is lowered, the rigorous attitude diminishes, which finds expression, among others, in the disapproval of a number of penalties applied by regulation during the execution of imprisonment.       Secondly  the attitude of the local community was presented not only towards prisoners, but also towards prison einployees. As compared with many other occupations, the prestige of prison employees is rather low, yet in spite of a certain social isolation, their general opinion is not negative. It is also worthy of attention that the sense of social distance between prisoners and community was les marked than expected.       Thirdly, the attitude was described towards prison as a physical object and an institution in the local community. This problem was studies by means of questions about the opinion on the very fact of existence of such an object in twon, the possible impact the prison has on economy, supplies, etc., an  the citizens’  feeling of safety. In this formulation, the results fail to point to the existence of markedly negative attitudes, though some socio-demographic features of the examined persons tend  to differentiate their answers.       The study was realized from 1979 till 1981. In spite of the considerable interval and the differences in the country's respective social situations, the answers given by the examined persons from both groups were nearly parallel to each other.      In 1979, random samples of adults were examined, inhabitants of two towns, about 25 thousand inhabitants each, in which there were prisons. In one of these towns, the prison had been established over 20 years before, while in the second one, it was only a few years old. In each town, 200 persons were examined by means of a questionnaire, which makes the total of 400 examined persons.        In 1981, 462 persons were examined by means of the same questionnaire, who were selected with the use of "Quota Sampling" from the population of 10 towns of 11 to 95 thousand of inhabitants, in which there were prisons.        The study was intentionally realized in towns of medium population. The aim was to examine communities large enough for the prison not to dominate them on the one hand, and on the other hand, small enough to enable an assumption that a majority of inhabitants have a certain knowledge and opinions about the prison acquired through observation and nin-institutionalized flow of information.       As regards the opinion on imprisonment, it should first of all be stressed that over  50 per cent of the examined persons are of opinion that the essential aim oi this type of penalty should be the resocialization of prisoners. About 23 per cent of answers concerning this problem referred to the idea of individual prevention; 12-18 per cent of the examined persons were of opinion that imprisonment should serve to protect the society from the criminal by isolating him for a certain period of time; about 6 per cent of answers pointed to retribution as the aim of punishment, while  as few as 2-3 per cent considered the aim to be general prevention.        However, to find out if the attitude of the examined persons was rigorous or tolerant, answers to other questions were more significant, that is those concerning the mothods of execution of imprisonment, i.e., the penalties and rewards applied  towards  prisoners and the rights they enjoy. Here, a significant trend appeared to turn from rigorous to tolerant  attitudes as the level of generality of questions lowered. It seems that questions about certain abstract principles, which in the mind of an average man have no connection with any actual situation or person,  provoked answers which hinted at a rigorous attitude; yet whenever the same respondent had to answer a question which allowed him to realize the details of a given situation or the position of a given persons in such circumstances, the tolerant attitude prevailed.       Thus, for instance, as many as over 70 per cent of the examined persons approved of the most  general  statement that  „in prison, strict discipline should reign”.  When another question was asked, this time less generally formulated,  if „all amenities of life and attractive activities should be reduced to a minimum”, the numbers of approving and disapproving answers were more or less equal, which points to the lowering of the level of rigorism. The answers to further questions concerning definite cases frankly contradict  those given  to the former questions and point to a markedly tolerant attitude. Thus, for example, the question if „a prisoner should have free access to newspapers, radio, and TV in his leisure time”, was answered in the affirmative by over 75 per cent of the examined persons.       Also the questions about definite penalties and rewards applied towards prisoners were answered in a way which seems to point to the prevalence of tolerant attitudes over rigorism. The majority of the examined persons are for abolition or limitation of penalties provided by prison regulations and for granting the prisoners with a number of rights, such as unlimited receipt of parcels, letters, and visitors from the outside (prison regulations limit the number of such prisoners' contacts with the outside world and treat any extension of these contacts as a special reward). The examined  persons were also for alegal regulation of the sphere of prisoners' work, pointing to the need for making the working conditions in prison resemble those generally found in State-controlled economy.       Also the rational attitude of the public opinion towards prison should be stressed. The prison is perceived as an institution which could play a greater part than before in the life of the local community, particularly through including prisoners in the borader social unit and increasing their participation in the town’s economic activity. The citizens’ expectations point in this direction, accompanied also by the favourable opinion as to the extending of the prisoners' range of personal liberty outside the prison walls. In this connection, also the attitude of fear of the prisoners was much less marked than had been expected, as well as the bias against them, both of which appear in principle only as regards a small group of dangerous criminals.       The attitude of the local community towards prison employees is a completely separate problem. It is characterized by a peculiar ambivalence: on the one hand, prison employees enjoy a good reputation as persons and members of the local community, their financial status perceived as decidedly higher than that of an average citizen. On the other hand, however, the social status of a prison employee is estimated as very low, as compared with other professions, which is accompanied by a stressed disapproval revealed by the examined persons of the very fact of working in a prison. This may lead to a conclusion that in the social consciousness disfavourable opinion persists as to the human relations in prison and the nature of work of prison employees. This is an additional factor which speaks for changes in the system of execution of the penalty of deprivation of liberty which would modernize it and adjust it to the contemporary progressive trends in the world. The present study has not only confirmed the existence of social support for such changes but it has also revealed the conducive atmosphere to a far-reaching reform in this field.
         Basically, the study concers three  problems. Firstly, an attempt was made to explain the mechanism which led to the results obtained by other authors. They found a supposedly most rigorous attitude of the Polish society towards law breakers, which was to become manifest in the demands for relentless and severe punishment of such persons. This highly rigorous attitude has been confirmed in the present study too, yet only in answers to questions drawn up as generally as those put by the mentioned authors. As the level of abstractness of the questions is lowered, the rigorous attitude diminishes, which finds expression, among others, in the disapproval of a number of penalties applied by regulation during the execution of imprisonment.       Secondly  the attitude of the local community was presented not only towards prisoners, but also towards prison einployees. As compared with many other occupations, the prestige of prison employees is rather low, yet in spite of a certain social isolation, their general opinion is not negative. It is also worthy of attention that the sense of social distance between prisoners and community was les marked than expected.       Thirdly, the attitude was described towards prison as a physical object and an institution in the local community. This problem was studies by means of questions about the opinion on the very fact of existence of such an object in twon, the possible impact the prison has on economy, supplies, etc., an  the citizens’  feeling of safety. In this formulation, the results fail to point to the existence of markedly negative attitudes, though some socio-demographic features of the examined persons tend  to differentiate their answers.       The study was realized from 1979 till 1981. In spite of the considerable interval and the differences in the country's respective social situations, the answers given by the examined persons from both groups were nearly parallel to each other.      In 1979, random samples of adults were examined, inhabitants of two towns, about 25 thousand inhabitants each, in which there were prisons. In one of these towns, the prison had been established over 20 years before, while in the second one, it was only a few years old. In each town, 200 persons were examined by means of a questionnaire, which makes the total of 400 examined persons.        In 1981, 462 persons were examined by means of the same questionnaire, who were selected with the use of "Quota Sampling" from the population of 10 towns of 11 to 95 thousand of inhabitants, in which there were prisons.        The study was intentionally realized in towns of medium population. The aim was to examine communities large enough for the prison not to dominate them on the one hand, and on the other hand, small enough to enable an assumption that a majority of inhabitants have a certain knowledge and opinions about the prison acquired through observation and nin-institutionalized flow of information.       As regards the opinion on imprisonment, it should first of all be stressed that over  50 per cent of the examined persons are of opinion that the essential aim oi this type of penalty should be the resocialization of prisoners. About 23 per cent of answers concerning this problem referred to the idea of individual prevention; 12-18 per cent of the examined persons were of opinion that imprisonment should serve to protect the society from the criminal by isolating him for a certain period of time; about 6 per cent of answers pointed to retribution as the aim of punishment, while  as few as 2-3 per cent considered the aim to be general prevention.        However, to find out if the attitude of the examined persons was rigorous or tolerant, answers to other questions were more significant, that is those concerning the mothods of execution of imprisonment, i.e., the penalties and rewards applied  towards  prisoners and the rights they enjoy. Here, a significant trend appeared to turn from rigorous to tolerant  attitudes as the level of generality of questions lowered. It seems that questions about certain abstract principles, which in the mind of an average man have no connection with any actual situation or person,  provoked answers which hinted at a rigorous attitude; yet whenever the same respondent had to answer a question which allowed him to realize the details of a given situation or the position of a given persons in such circumstances, the tolerant attitude prevailed.       Thus, for instance, as many as over 70 per cent of the examined persons approved of the most  general  statement that  „in prison, strict discipline should reign”.  When another question was asked, this time less generally formulated,  if „all amenities of life and attractive activities should be reduced to a minimum”, the numbers of approving and disapproving answers were more or less equal, which points to the lowering of the level of rigorism. The answers to further questions concerning definite cases frankly contradict  those given  to the former questions and point to a markedly tolerant attitude. Thus, for example, the question if „a prisoner should have free access to newspapers, radio, and TV in his leisure time”, was answered in the affirmative by over 75 per cent of the examined persons.       Also the questions about definite penalties and rewards applied towards prisoners were answered in a way which seems to point to the prevalence of tolerant attitudes over rigorism. The majority of the examined persons are for abolition or limitation of penalties provided by prison regulations and for granting the prisoners with a number of rights, such as unlimited receipt of parcels, letters, and visitors from the outside (prison regulations limit the number of such prisoners' contacts with the outside world and treat any extension of these contacts as a special reward). The examined  persons were also for alegal regulation of the sphere of prisoners' work, pointing to the need for making the working conditions in prison resemble those generally found in State-controlled economy.       Also the rational attitude of the public opinion towards prison should be stressed. The prison is perceived as an institution which could play a greater part than before in the life of the local community, particularly through including prisoners in the borader social unit and increasing their participation in the town’s economic activity. The citizens’ expectations point in this direction, accompanied also by the favourable opinion as to the extending of the prisoners' range of personal liberty outside the prison walls. In this connection, also the attitude of fear of the prisoners was much less marked than had been expected, as well as the bias against them, both of which appear in principle only as regards a small group of dangerous criminals.       The attitude of the local community towards prison employees is a completely separate problem. It is characterized by a peculiar ambivalence: on the one hand, prison employees enjoy a good reputation as persons and members of the local community, their financial status perceived as decidedly higher than that of an average citizen. On the other hand, however, the social status of a prison employee is estimated as very low, as compared with other professions, which is accompanied by a stressed disapproval revealed by the examined persons of the very fact of working in a prison. This may lead to a conclusion that in the social consciousness disfavourable opinion persists as to the human relations in prison and the nature of work of prison employees. This is an additional factor which speaks for changes in the system of execution of the penalty of deprivation of liberty which would modernize it and adjust it to the contemporary progressive trends in the world. The present study has not only confirmed the existence of social support for such changes but it has also revealed the conducive atmosphere to a far-reaching reform in this field.
    Źródło:
    Archiwum Kryminologii; 1984, XI; 245-267
    0066-6890
    2719-4280
    Pojawia się w:
    Archiwum Kryminologii
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Gloss to the Judgement of the Constitutional Tribunal of 11 June 2019 (P 20/17, OTK-A 2019, Item 29)
    Autorzy:
    Nowosad, Aleksandra
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/618509.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2020
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej
    Tematy:
    restriction of liberty
    imprisonment
    sequence of the penalties
    aggregate penalty
    concurrent sentence
    concurrent offences
    kara ograniczenia wolności
    kara pozbawienia wolności
    sekwencja kar
    kara łączna
    wyrok łączny
    zbieg przestępstw
    Opis:
    The author agrees with the Constitutional Tribunal’s opinion that Article 87 § 1 of the Penal Code to the extent that it imposes an obligation on the court to combine imprisonment and restriction of liberty and to impose a total penalty of deprivation of liberty after converting the penalty of restriction of liberty into imprisonment is inconsistent with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. In addition, the author raised the problem of ratio legis of Article 87 of the Penal Code and indicated why the deficiencies in regulation were noticed so late in the case law.
    Autorka podziela stanowisko Trybunału Konstytucyjnego, że art. 87 § 1 k.k. w zakresie, w jakim nakłada na sąd obowiązek połączenia kar pozbawienia wolności i ograniczenia wolności oraz wymierzenia kary łącznej pozbawienia wolności po dokonaniu zamiany kary ograniczenia wolności na karę pozbawienia wolności, jest niezgodny z Konstytucją RP. Dodatkowo poruszono problem ratio legis art. 87 k.k. i wskazano, dlaczego tak późno w orzecznictwie zostały dostrzeżone mankamenty regulacji.
    Źródło:
    Studia Iuridica Lublinensia; 2020, 29, 3
    1731-6375
    Pojawia się w:
    Studia Iuridica Lublinensia
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Przesłanki formalne warunkowego zwolnienia skazanego z odbycia reszty kary pozbawienia wolności po rocznej przerwie jej wykonania
    Формальные предпосылки для условного освобождения осужденного от отбывания оставшейся части наказания в виде лишения свободы после годичного перерыва в его отбывании
    Формальні критерія умовного звільнення засудженого від відбування решти покарання у вигляді позбавлення волі після однорічної перерви у його виконанні
    Formal prerequisites for conditional release of a convicted person from serving the remainder of a prison sentence after a one-year break from its execution
    Autorzy:
    Stefańska, Blanka Julita
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/2090131.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2022-06-09
    Wydawca:
    Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II
    Tematy:
    позбавлення волі
    перерва у виконанні покарання
    формальні причини
    розмір покарання
    засуджений
    умовно-дострокове звільнення
    зупинення провадження
    наказание в виде лишения свободы
    прерывание срока исполнения наказания
    формальные предпосылки
    quantum наказания
    осужденный
    условно-досрочное освобождение
    приостановление производства по делу
    imprisonment
    interruption of sentence
    break in sentence
    conditional release
    formal prerequisites
    quantum of sentence
    convict
    suspension of proceedings
    kara pozbawienia wolności
    przerwa w wykonaniu kary
    przesłanki formalne
    quantum kary
    skazany
    warunkowe zwolnienie
    zawieszenie postępowania
    Opis:
    Artykuł stanowi analizę przesłanek formalnych warunkowego zwolnienia skazanego z odbycia reszty kary pozbawienia wolności po rocznej przerwie jej wykonania, które jest szczególnym rodzajem tej instytucji (art. 155 Kodeksu karnego wykonawczego). Są to: 1) odbycie przez skazanego co najmniej 6 miesięcy kary; 2) nieprzekroczenie przez orzeczoną karę lub sumę kar 3 lat; 3) korzystanie przez skazanego z przerwy w wykonaniu kary co najmniej przez rok (§ 1). Doprowadziła ona do wniosków, że quantum wykonanej kary musi mieć miejsce przed uzyskaniem przez skazanego przerwy w wykonaniu kary, z tym że kara nie musi być odbyta w trybie ciągłym, lecz może także odbywać się etapami. Przerwa w wykonaniu kary pozbawienia wolności ma trwać co najmniej rok i nie musi być jednorazowo udzielona na ten okres, ale może być wielokrotnie przedłużana. Bez znaczenia jest zarówno przyczyna całej przerwy, jak i poszczególnych przedłużanych przerw. Na równi z przerwą w wykonaniu kary pozbawienia wolności należy traktować zawieszenie postępowania wykonawczego co do kary pozbawienia wolności w przypadku, gdy skazany rozpoczął już odbywanie kary pozbawienia wolności, lecz nie można wykonać wobec niego orzeczenia z powodu choroby psychicznej lub innej przewlekłej, ciężkiej choroby (art. 15 § 2 K.k.w.).      
    У статті аналізуються формальні критерія умовного звільнення засудженого від відбування решти покарання у вигляді позбавлення волі після однорічної перерви у його виконанні, що є особливим видом цього інституту (ст. 155 КК РФ). Це: 1) відбуття засудженим не менше 6 місяців покарання; 2) покарання або сума покарання не перевищили 3 років; 3) засудженнй використав перерву у виконанні покарання не менше одного року (§ 1). Це привело до висновку, що відлік виконаного вироку має відбутися до перерви у виконанні покарання засудженим, однак покарання не повинно відбуватися безперервно, а може відбуватися і поетапно. Перерва у виконанні покарання у виді позбавлення волі має тривати не менше одного року і на цей термін не обов’язково надаватися один раз, але може бути продовжена кілька разів. Причина як усієї перерви, так і окремих продовжених перерв не має значення. Зупинення виконавчого провадження щодо покарання у виді позбавлення волі слід трактувати нарівні з перервою у виконанні покарання у вигляді позбавлення волі, якщо засуджений вже почав відбувати покарання у вигляді позбавлення волі, але вирок не може бути виконаний стосовно до нього через психічне захворювання або іншу хронічну тяжку хворобу (ст. 15 § 2 Виконавчого кримінального кодексу).
    Статья представляет собой анализ формальных предпосылок условного освобождения осужденного от отбывания оставшейся части наказания в виде лишения свободы после годичного перерыва в его отбывании, что является особым видом данного института (ст. 155 Уголовно-исполнительного кодекса). К ним относятся: (1) условие, чтобы осужденный отбыл не менее 6 месяцев наказания; (2) условие, чтобы назначенное наказание или сумма наказаний не превышала 3 лет; (3) условие, чтобы осужденный воспользовался перерывом в исполнении наказания не менее одного года (§ 1). Это привело к выводу, что quantum наказания должно происходить до того, как осужденный получит перерыв в исполнении наказания, однако наказание не обязательно должно отбываться непрерывно, но также может отбываться поэтапно. Перерыв в исполнении наказания в виде лишения свободы должен длиться не менее одного года и не обязательно должен быть предоставлен один раз на этот период, но может быть неоднократно продлен. Причина как всего перерыва, так и отдельных продлеваемых перерывов не имеет значения. Наравне с перерывом в отбывании наказания в виде лишения свободы, надо рассматривать приостановление исполнительного производства в отношении приговора к лишению свободы в случае, если осужденный уже начал отбывать наказание в виде лишения свободы, но приговор в отношении его не может быть исполнен из-за психического заболевания или другой хронической, тяжелой болезни (статья 15 § 2 Уголовно-исполнительного кодекса).
    The article analyses the formal prerequisites for the conditional release of a convicted person from serving rest of the sentence of imprisonment after one-year break in its execution which constitutes special type of this institution (Article 155 of Penal Enforcement Code). These are: 1) that the convicted person has served at least 6 months of sentence; 2) that the sentence imposed or the sum of the sentences has not exceeded 3 years; 3) that the convicted person has benefited from a break in the execution of the sentence for at least one year (§ 1). It led to the conclusion that quantum of the sentence served must have taken place before the convicted person obtained a break in the execution of the sentence, except that the sentence need not be served continuously, but may also be served in stages. A break in the execution of a sentence of imprisonment is to last for at least one year and does not have to be granted once for that period, but may be repeatedly extended. The reasons for both the entire break and the individual extended breaks is irrelevant. Suspension of the enforcement proceedings with regard to a sentence of imprisonment should be treated on a equal footing with a break in the execution of the sentence of imprisonment if the convicted person has already started serving his sentence, but the sentence cannot be executed against him due to a mental illness or other chronic, serious illness (Article 15 § 2 of Penal Enforcement Code).
    Źródło:
    Studia Prawnicze KUL; 2022, 2; 129-143
    1897-7146
    2719-4264
    Pojawia się w:
    Studia Prawnicze KUL
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    On the Need to Repeal or Change Art. 87 of the Criminal Code
    Autorzy:
    Nowosad, Aleksandra
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/619089.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2017
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej
    Tematy:
    restriction of liberty
    imprisonment
    sequence of the penalties
    aggregate penalty
    concurrent sentence
    amendments to the Criminal Code
    concurrent offences, mixed punishment
    kara ograniczenia wolności
    kara pozbawienia wolności
    sekwencja kar
    kara łączna
    wyrok łączny
    reforma prawa karnego
    zbieg przestępstw
    łączenie kar różnorodzajowych
    kara mieszana
    Opis:
    The author postulates that as a consequence of introducing in the Act of 20 February 2015 the institution of simultaneous adjudication of imprisonment and restriction of liberty, the legislator should repeal Art. 87 of the Criminal Code. According to Art. 87 § 1 of the C.C., in the case of conviction for concurrent offences for penalties of deprivation of liberty and restriction of liberty, the court shall impose an aggregate penalty, assuming that one month of restriction of liberty is equal to 15 days of deprivation of liberty. The sequence of penalties introduced in Art. 37b of the C.C. undermines the purpose of Art. 87 § 1 of the C.C. Since the legislator introduced a new concept of sequential execution of penalties, he should not preserve the obligation to convert restriction of liberty into imprisonment.
    Wprowadzając reformą z dnia 20 lutego 2015 r. możliwość jednoczesnego orzeczenia kar ograniczenia wolności i pozbawienia wolności, ustawodawca powinien konsekwentnie uchylić art. 87 Kodeksu karnego nakazujący w razie skazania za zbiegające się przestępstwa na kary pozbawienia wolności i ograniczenia wolności wymierzenie obligatoryjnie kary łącznej pozbawienia wolności. Przewidziane w art. 37b k.k. sekwencyjne wykonanie kar dezaktualizuje ratio legis unormowania art. 87 § 1 k.k. Skoro bowiem ustawodawca uznał za słuszną ideę kolejnego wykonania obu kar, nie powinien utrzymywać obowiązku zamiany kary ograniczenia wolności na karę pozbawienia wolności przy karze łącznej.
    Źródło:
    Studia Iuridica Lublinensia; 2017, 26, 2
    1731-6375
    Pojawia się w:
    Studia Iuridica Lublinensia
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
      Wyświetlanie 1-5 z 5

      Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies