[Brief facts of the case].
A small program has been added here, please go to the Toutiao client to view).
Between 2011 and 2014, the defendant Wang took advantage of his position to transfer 11195 acres of collective land went through false land acquisition procedures in the names of Bao, Ba, and Tuo, and a total of 134 land acquisition compensation was fraudulently obtained3.48 million yuan, and the defendant Wang's actual income was 1325.48 million yuan.
Between 2013 and 2014, in the process of assisting a county ** to engage in land acquisition in Dongcheng District, the defendant Wang took advantage of his position to seek improper benefits for A, Jia, Tu, Nu and others, and accepted a total of 23 property from A and others80,000 yuan.
A procuratorate prosecuted Wang to a county people's court on the grounds that he was suspected of ** or crime. Defendant Wang handed over most of the money involved in the case to the court before the court filed the case.
*Opinion】The defender has no objection to the accusation that Wang is a part of the ** and a crime. However, there are still some facts in this case that are found to be incorrect, and the defendant has the circumstances of voluntary surrender, and has statutory and discretionary mitigating circumstances that should be determined, and some of the circumstances should not be found to be paragraph **.
1. Wang X has the circumstance of voluntary surrender and has relatively large judicial value.
In this case, Wang had the circumstances of surrendering. On June 10, 2015, Wang took the initiative to go to a procuratorate to explain the circumstances of the case, and on that day the procuratorate made a record of Wang's questioning, and the procuratorate's decision to file the case was issued on June 11, 2015. Moreover, when the judicial organs did not grasp the specific facts of the case, Wang took the initiative to confess the facts of the crime. It is precisely because of the guilty confession of the defendant Wang that the key facts of this case can be fixed. Therefore, the defendant Wang's initiative and direct confession of the facts of his crime when the procuratorate did not take compulsory measures against him complies with the relevant provisions of China's current criminal law on voluntary surrender, and should be found to be voluntary surrender in accordance with law.
2. Defendant Wang did not subjectively seek to take possession of state-owned property for himself, and actively returned the stolen goods before turning himself in on June 9, 2015, proving that he did show remorse. The defendant's family economic conditions are very good, and the defendant subjectively did not do it for **, but was worried that the money would be collected by the township ** if it was placed in the account of the village committee, so he put the money in his personal account. Moreover, before the defendant was brought into the case, he had actively returned more than 180 yuan of stolen money on June 9, 2015, and Wang's above-mentioned behavior fully reflected his sincere remorse and indeed showed remorse.
3. This case accuses Wang **,
*Crime, there are some errors in the determination of facts.
1) 55The compensation for 9 acres of land was found to be inappropriate for the defendant Wang's ** payment.
This land is the land used by the director of the sheep farm Re as wage compensation when Wang drove in the sheep farm in 1994, and it was made up by Wang to give it his name, and Wang has been cultivating it from 1996 to 2011. When the land was expropriated, because Wang did not have three certificates, he found Bao to expropriate the land in the name of Bao in the form of replacing the land, and obtained the land expropriation money. This paragraph is not a ** paragraph, but the land compensation that the defendant Wang should receive.
2) It is incorrect to identify Bu's land compensation as defendant Wang's ** payment:
Wang has been operating 35 acres of land for a long time (long-term residence in other places, and comes back every 3-4 years to collect contracting fees), which is within the scope of expropriation. After the levy was collected, Bu's land requisition money was kept by the defendant and was only waiting for Bu to be delivered to him after he returned, so this money was not **.
3) Defendant Wang X is a first-time offender, and he made many contributions to the unit before this crime, and I sincerely request that he be given a lighter punishment at his discretion.
Defendant Wang had never received any criminal punishment before this offense. In addition, when Wang served as the secretary of the party branch and the director of the village committee of a village, he worked diligently and conscientiously. Although the defendant Wang should bear legal responsibility for his criminal acts, in line with the principle of clear merit and excess, it is hoped that the court will consider that he has made contributions to rural construction in the past and give him a lighter punishment while determining that he has made contributions to rural construction in the past.
Verdict] First-instance verdict: 1. The defendant Wang committed the crime of ** and was sentenced to 12 years imprisonment and a fine of 100,000 yuan;committed ** crime and was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment;It was decided to enforce the sentence of 15 years imprisonment and a fine of 100,000 yuan.
2. The stolen RMB 1563480 withdrawn by defendant Wang is to be confiscated, and the temporary storage unit is to hand it over to the state treasury within 10 days of the judgment taking effect.
The court of second instance ruled to revoke the criminal judgment of the Zhaosu County People's Court (2015) Zhao Xing Chu Zi No. 110;Remand to the Zhaosu County People's Court for a new trial.
Judgment documents] This court believes that the defendant Wang, who served as the secretary of the party branch and director of the village committee of a village during 2013, took advantage of his position to take 340,000 yuan in compensation for land acquisition of 25 acres of collective land as his own in the process of assisting a county in the process of land acquisition in Dongcheng District, which was huge, and his behavior violated the provisions of Article 382 of the Criminal Law, and the defendant Wang's behavior constituted a crime of **. At the same time, during his tenure of office, defendant Wang took advantage of his position to seek improper benefits for A, Jia, Tu and others, and accepted a total of 23 property from A80,000 yuan, a huge amount, the act has constituted a ** crime, and he should be punished for several crimes in accordance with the law. Regarding the other accusations of the defendant Wang X constituting the crime of **, this court believes that for the first accusation of receiving compensation for land requisition in the name of Tu, according to the evidence provided by the public prosecution, the defendant Wang X has actually occupied and used 50 mu of land in the name of "Tu X" since 1996, and in 1998 there was a 50 mu of land contracting and management right of "Tu X" in the second round of land contracting roster, and the public prosecution did not provide evidence to prove that the defendant Wang X contracted in the name of Tu X. The act of planting the above-mentioned 50 acres of land is not legal, so this court cannot confirm that the defendant's act of receiving the above-mentioned 50 acres of land acquisition compensation constitutes ** based on the available evidence, so this court does not support this accusation;With regard to the second allegation of compensation for land expropriation by Ba, this court believes that the compensation and contract fee for the expropriation of 31 mu of land actually obtained by the defendant Wang are true, but according to the second round of land contract roster, the registered right holder of the land is Bu X, who is not involved in the case, and the defendant Wang X actually occupied the land at the time of the above-mentioned land expropriation, and the public prosecution organ should ascertain the relationship with Bu, and the public prosecution organ did not provide evidence to prove that the defendant Wang's receipt of compensation for the land expropriation of Bu X was not legal, so it could not be confirmed that the defendant's conduct constituted** Therefore, this court does not support this allegation. Defendant Wang truthfully confessed to a crime that he had not yet been grasped by the procuratorate before the procuratorate filed a case, and he surrendered voluntarily;At the same time, the defendant actively returned the stolen goods and showed a certain degree of remorse, and may be given a lighter punishment in accordance with law.
The second instance held that the first case determined by the original trial was 55The facts of the crime of 95 mu of land requisition compensation, the second case of 31 mu of land requisition compensation and the fourth case of 10 mu of land requisition compensation are unclear and the evidence is insufficient.
Case Analysis] In this case, Wang had the circumstance of voluntary surrender, and actively returned the stolen goods before surrendering, and indeed showed remorse. 55There are problems with the compensation for 9 acres of land and the compensation for Bu's land, which needs to be determined through relevant evidence.
Conclusion and Recommendations].
This case mainly revolves around the defendant Wang's error in the determination of some facts in the composition of the crime and his voluntary surrender, and his ability to actively return the stolen goods, proving that he did show remorse, and subjectively not for the purpose of taking possession of state-owned property for himself, combined with the fact that the defendant Wang was a first-time offender and made many contributions to the unit before this crime, he may be given a discretionary lighter punishment.
Relevant legal knowledge.
What is the provision for deprivation of political rights in the punishment of crimes?
The following provisions shall be attached to the supplementary punishment of deprivation of political rights: deprivation of political rights shall be attached to criminals who endanger the people;Deprivation of political rights may be attached to criminals who seriously disrupt social order, such as intentional homicide, arson, poisoning, and robbery.
Deprivation of political rights refers to the method of punishment that deprives the offender of the right to participate in State administration and political activities. In addition to the deprivation of political rights for life, the restoration of political rights shall be declared upon the expiration of the period of deprivation of political rights;When political rights are restored, political rights are enjoyed. However, some political rights are no longer possible because of special provisions of the law. For example, according to the Organic Law of the People's Courts and the Law on Procurators, a person who has been criminally punished (including, of course, a person who has been deprived of political rights) cannot serve as a judge or prosecutor.
According to the provisions of China's Criminal Law, supplementary punishment, also known as accessory punishment, is a method of punishment applicable to supplement the principal punishment. Supplementary sentences may be applied either additionally or independently. When supplementary penalties are applied, two or more supplementary penalties may be applied to a crime at the same time.
There are 9 types of punishment in China's criminal law. Among them, there are 5 main punishments, including public surveillance, criminal detention, fixed-term imprisonment, life imprisonment and the death penalty. There are four types of additional punishments, including fines, deprivation of political rights, confiscation of property and deportation.
In addition, in actual cases, two or more additional sentences may be imposed. Judging from the content of the provisions of the current Criminal Law on the combined punishment of several crimes under several different circumstances, they all refer to the combined punishment of the principal punishment and do not include the combined punishment of supplementary punishment. At present, in the absence of clarity in the provisions of the law, judges may combine the punishment of supplementary punishments according to the principles determined by different circumstances, that is, the principle of limiting aggravation, the principle of concurrent punishment, and the principle of absorption, which are the three major principles of combined punishment for multiple crimes recognized by the criminal law theory and judicial circles.
Legal basis] Article 55 of the Criminal Law provides that the period of deprivation of political rights shall be between one year and not more than five years, except as provided for in Article 57 of this Law.
Where a sentence of controlled release is imposed with additional deprivation of political rights, the period of deprivation of political rights is equal to the period of controlled release, and is to be enforced at the same time.
Disclaimer] The article case process, **all** on the Internet, this article aims to popularize the law with cases, no vulgarity and other bad guidance. If you are involved in copyright or character infringement issues, please contact us in time, and we will delete the content!In particular, there is no fabrication of facts in this article.
Disclaimer] The article case process, **all** on the Internet, this article aims to popularize the law with cases, no vulgarity and other bad guidance. If you are involved in copyright or character infringement issues, please contact us in time, and we will delete the content!In particular, there is no fabrication of facts in this article.