Ambiguity of Legislative Approaches to Criminal Evaluation of Intoxication
Е. К. Газданова
Abstract
Е. К. Газданова
Abstract
This article analyzes federal laws on the basis of which intoxication is seen in the following criminal ways: aggravating circumstance (Part 1.1, Article 63 of the Criminal Code...); structural feature of a crime (Article 264.1 of the Criminal Code.); qualifying (qualifying special) sign of a crime (parts 2, 4, 6 Art. 264 of the Criminal Code). The adoption of these laws shows the ambiguity of the criminal evaluation of the state of intoxication by a legislator and questions the need for art. 23 of the Criminal Code, which, despite the innovations, reflected a neutral legislator's attitude towards the intoxication at the time of committing the crime.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This article analyzes federal laws on the basis of which intoxication is seen in the following criminal ways: aggravating circumstance (Part 1.1, Article 63 of the Criminal Code...); structural feature of a crime (Article 264.1 of the Criminal Code.); qualifying (qualifying special) sign of a crime (parts 2, 4, 6 Art. 264 of the Criminal Code). The adoption of these laws shows the ambiguity of the criminal evaluation of the state of intoxication by a legislator and questions the need for art. 23 of the Criminal Code, which, despite the innovations, reflected a neutral legislator's attitude towards the intoxication at the time of committing the crime.
Key concepts: Legislator, Criminal code, Ambiguity, Legislature, Criminal law, Sign (mathematics), Political science, Criminal procedure