本文選題：盜竊 + 詐騙��； 參考：《中國(guó)檢察官》2016年20期

【摘要】："假借手機(jī)趁機(jī)溜走"的行為在理論與實(shí)踐中有所爭(zhēng)議,同一行為人以同一作案手法在不同地區(qū)被分別以盜竊罪與詐騙罪定罪量刑。從實(shí)體上分析定性,面對(duì)定性盜竊逐漸成為主流觀點(diǎn)的趨勢(shì),定性詐騙更加符合非法占有行為的關(guān)鍵環(huán)節(jié)。從程序上看待判決,從中級(jí)法院轄區(qū)的內(nèi)部統(tǒng)一到高級(jí)法院轄區(qū)的省級(jí)統(tǒng)一,有必要在一定程度上減少同案不同判的趨勢(shì)。
[Abstract]:The behavior of "taking advantage of the opportunity of using mobile phone" has been disputed in theory and practice, and the same perpetrator has been convicted and sentenced in different areas for theft and fraud respectively. In the face of the trend that qualitative theft has gradually become the mainstream view, qualitative fraud is more in line with the key link of illegal possession. To a certain extent, it is necessary to reduce the trend of different judgments in the same case, from the internal unification of the intermediate court jurisdiction to the provincial unity of the superior court jurisdiction.
【作者單位】： 西南政法大學(xué);重慶市南岸區(qū)人民檢察院;
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D920.5;D926.22

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 殷增華;;“同案不同判”的法理分析和現(xiàn)實(shí)對(duì)策[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年25期

，

本文編號(hào)：2056551