不当得利与财产性犯罪的区分认定——以实际疑难案例为分析样本

由于社会现象的纷繁复杂,使得民事不法与刑事不法交错相生,难以正确地加以界分。在对一些疑难案例的分析认定过程中,往往会涉及多种侵犯财产利益的不法行为,不当得利与财产性犯罪的界限模糊不清。对不当得利与财产性犯罪的区分认定,应当在其一般理论的基础上,以行为对象为切入角度,进而依据权属关系的变动情况来认定行为人的主观方面和客观行为,最终确定该不法行为的性质。     

网络背景下．认定盗窃虚拟财产行为若干疑难问题

虚拟财产是以数字化、非物化的形式存储在虚拟网络空间中,被网友或者游戏玩家利用网络服务器拥有、支配的有价值的一种财产形式。虚拟财产具备刑法意义上的财产属性,属于盗窃罪的犯罪对象。网络背景下,对盗窃虚拟财产犯罪客观方面的危害行为、危害后果等要件的司法认定应结合其自身特点进行,以准确地打击该种犯罪。     

专利侵权行为犯罪化的边缘性审视

专利领域由刑法规制的犯罪目前只有假冒他人专利罪,更为常见的侵犯专利权人独占实施权的行为一直被置于民事救济和行政救济的保护下,专利侵权行为犯罪化的问题值得探讨。以犯罪圈的划定、被害人的权益保护和刑事政策的指导为视角来进行专利侵权犯罪化的边缘性审视,应限制性地设置侵犯专利罪,将情节严重的专利侵权行为纳入刑法的规制。     

重新界定我国强奸罪中“性交”之内涵——以“戴套不算强奸”案为视角

传统的强奸罪只将犯罪对象限定为女性,由于时代的不断发展,在强奸犯罪的领域出现了各种不同的新情况,而我国强奸罪的现行立法面对这些新情况则没有回应。应该结合目前的实际情况,扩大强奸罪中＂性交＂的内涵以满足打击此类犯罪的需要。     

毒品犯罪刑事对策探究

毒品犯罪是全球的社会公害,由毒品问题引发的犯罪在迅速上升,成为影响社会稳定的重要因素。毒品犯罪的惩治与防范是我们无法回避的问题。从刑事对策上来说,至少应从两个方面来努力：一要严密刑事法网;二要加强刑事司法。     

再论非法持有毒品罪

毒品犯罪多以行为人非法持有毒品为前提,即持有行为是一个前后可承继性犯罪的中间环节,这就导致非法持有毒品罪与其他毒品犯罪的区分在理论上并非泾渭分明,在实践中也疑难丛出.从非法持有毒品罪之于其他毒品犯罪来看,其属于兜底性罪名,但这并不能意味为其他许多毒品违法犯罪行为查证出现困难提供解脱.解决这些问题,须立足于不同犯罪之构成要件的细致分析.只有如此,才能正确解决持有假毒品、吸毒者非法持有毒品以及盗窃、抢夺、抢劫毒品等行为的认定问题,才能处理好非法持有毒品和窝藏毒品行为的竞合问题.     

“虚拟”社区犯罪防控的价值及其实现

“虚拟”社区是实体社区的数字化存在,具有与真实社区同源异体的特征。“虚拟”社区因承载功能不同而具有不同的类型。“虚拟”社区蕴藏有犯罪防控所需的文化认同、情报信息、组织动员等资源性价值,也具有情报搜集、组织动员、警情通报、邻里守望等功能价值。提高“虚拟”社区犯罪防控价值的认识,搭建“虚拟”社区犯罪防控应用平台,创新“虚拟”社区犯罪防控新技术,培养“虚拟”社区犯罪防控力量,建构双向互动的工作模式,是“虚拟”社区犯罪防控价值实现的基本途径。     

A complicity continuum of state crime∗

State crime scholars and radical criminologists have struggled to draw distinctions between state-initiated and statefacilitated state crimes and state-corporate crimes. The first of these, a less contentious concept, denotes an explicit and distinct action by a state for the furtherance of its organizational goals which violates law or produces social injury. State-facilitated and state-corporate crimes have been defined as implicit actions or inactions by the state which facilitate social injury, harm, or violations of law. Here we seek to establish more clearly the parameters of the phenomenon of state crime by creating a multidimensional continuum of state crime complicity. A sample of cases found in the radical-state and state-corporate crime literature are placed on or between the two extremes of the continuum: commission-omission behavior and implicit-explicit policy.     

Use of Protection Motivation Theory to Assess Fear of Crime in Rural Areas

Fear of crime has long been the purview of sociology, with attitudes more extensively researched in higher risk urban populations. A sample of 184 rural participants from 36 states in the USA responded to a questionnaire on experiences of crime victimization, and attitudes toward crime, using the multidimensional Protection Motivation Theory (PMT) model. For the entire sample, perceived noxiousness of crime and personal risk corresponded to a recent history of victimization. Yet, victimization did not appear to alter perceptions of efficacy of proposed response or self efficacy in response to crime. When sorted by gender, women did express differences in perceptions of efficacy based on experience. The findings argue for fear of crime as a multidimensional construct, with implications for both research and applied programs.     

Crime is Part of the Problem: Contexts of Lethal Violence in Finland and the USA

According to Zimring & Hawkins, the exceptionally high level of homicide in the USA is unrelated to the nation's overall crime problem. In contrast to this statement, a critical review of their evidence suggests that criminal activity may explain a significant share of the excess levels of lethal violence in the USA. As a first step towards testing this hypothesis, we have created a uniform victim-level data file of information on the method and the situational context of homicide cases in Finland and the USA. In support of the hypothesis, we find that homicides that occur in the context of another crime are much more prevalent in the USA than in Finland. This difference accounts for 35% of the overall gap in the homicide rate between these two nations. Moreover, our research indicates that the effect of the criminal context cannot be reduced to the 'instrument effect', i.e. the fact that handguns are much more prevalent in the USA. In light of these findings, it would be premature, in terms both of theory and of public policy, to treat lethal violence as a problem entirely independent of other crime.