Structure of Willful Criminal Type: Objective and Subjective

Posted on Dec 15, 2024 in Law & Jurisprudence

Structure of Willful Criminal Type

I. Objective Evidence (Objective Type)

1. Typical Action

  • Verb Type, Body, or Core
  • Descriptive Elements of a Kind: These are likely to be perceived by the senses (e.g., woman, thing, wire, post).
  • Standard Features: Those that imply value judgments may be cultural or legal.
  • Modes of Operation Characteristics of a Kind or Subject: Assets, subject, material, time, place of commission, and others.
  • Assets Subject: Who is doing all or part of the action described in the type.
  • Liabilities Subject of the Action: The person on whom the typical action is performed.
  • Victim of the Crime: The title of legal interests.
  • Typical Scope of Action: The person or thing on which the action rests.
  • Legal Subject of Crime: The legal right.

2. The Result of the Criminal Action (Second Element of Objective Type)

This is the impact or modification that causes the activity in the material world. For the result of the action to have criminal legal significance, it must be:

  • A) Considered by the typical description.
  • B) Causally linked to the action taken.

3. Causation (Third Element of Objective Type)

Theories:

  • A) Theory of Equivalence of the Condition: Every event is the product of a set of material circumstances. Applying the hypothetical mental suppression method, the result will be attributed to all circumstances concurrent with its production and hypothesized to be mentally deleted. Cause and condition are considered.
  • B) Adequate Cause Theory: Although any effect is a consequence of a set of conditions, not all qualify as a cause (condition and cause are not synonymous) because they do not have the same significance. A cause is one that, according to general experience, normally produces this result.
  • C) Theory of the Necessary Cause: A cause is a condition that would necessarily have produced the result. For example, a decapitating injury will result in death.
  • D) Theory of the Legally Relevant Case: The relevance or appropriateness of typical deviation (Beling 1931-Mezger). It is not about any action and any outcome, but the causality that links the typical action with the typical result.

Subjective Type of Crimes of Action

  • Dolo: The consciousness or knowledge and will to commit a crime (F. Muñoz Conde). It does not require knowledge or awareness of whether the act is good or bad (unlawful) or whether one is responsible (guilty).

Dolo Elements

  • A) Cognitive (Intellectual): Assets subject to knowing all the features that make up the action described by type and objective elements, both descriptive and normative.
  • B) Volitional (Will): To will the concretion of the type. To want the result of a kind. It does not involve intending to achieve it precisely.

Dolo Classification

  • Direct or First Degree: The intent of the subject, those who tried, agrees with the result of the action.
  • Indirect or Second Degree: The action is not specifically addressed to the result, but knowing that it is made, that result is a safe and inevitable consequence.
  • Eventual Dolo: The subject, while pursuing a result that is not illegal, considers the illegal result as a possibility and, notwithstanding, does not take steps to prevent it.

II. Subjective Aspects of Unfairness

These are all those subjective requirements, in addition to Dolo, that the rate requires for carrying out the act.

Atypical Conduct

Atypical conduct is the lack of typicality, determining the exclusion of crime:

  • A) For being socially appropriate conduct or not adversely affecting a legal right.
  • B) For lack of goals of a kind of items.
  • C) Acts of God (Art. 10 n° 8).
  • D) Torts: This is a typical fact unless expressly sanctioned by law.
  • E) Consent of the victim regarding the available assets.

The Error Rate

The error rate is that which lies on a component of the typical fact (E. Cury). The Dolo requires knowledge of the objective-type elements. If one has no knowledge of them or when one incurred a typical action error.

Acting on Behalf of

The error is limited to the Dolo if:

  • A) If the agent represents the action as directed to cause an atypical consequence, the error causes a typical result.
  • B) If, after representing their action as addressed to produce any particular typical result, a more serious one is caused.
Acting Against

Error in reverse:

  • If you represent the action as addressed to a typical result and, as a consequence of the error, no result is produced or a minor but typical one is produced.