The sentence was changed due to incorrect recognition of recidivism in the actions of the convicted person and incorrect assignment of the regime of the Correctional Institution of the criminal control system
By the verdict of the Enbekshikazakh District Court of Almaty region dated January 12, 2017 Sh. earlier, by the verdict of the Enbekshikazakh District Court of October 27, 2016, he was sentenced to 5 years of imprisonment under Paragraph 7) of Part 2 of Article 106 of the Criminal Code,-with the confiscation of personal property by paragraph 3) of Part 2 of Article 191 of the Criminal Code, to 3 years and 6 months of imprisonment, with partial addition of the penalties imposed in accordance with Part 3 of Article 58 of the Criminal Code he was sentenced to 6 years in prison with the confiscation of his personal property, and was sentenced to serve his sentence in a strict correctional colony. In accordance with Part 1 of Article 14 of the criminal code, recidivism of a crime is recognized in the actions of Sh. The case was not considered on appeal. By the verdict of the court, sh. and S. were found guilty of open embezzlement of other people's property by a group of people. In accordance with Part 1 of Article 14 of the criminal code, the commission of a serious crime by this person is recognized as a repetition of crimes if a person has previously been sentenced to imprisonment for committing a serious crime. Judging by the documents of the criminal case, the convicted Sh. By the verdict of the Enbekshikazakh District Court of Almaty region dated October 27, 2016, he committed a crime found guilty by paragraph 7) of Part 2 of Article 106 of the criminal code on May 8, 2016, for which he was sentenced to 5 years in prison. And by the verdict of the Enbekshikazakh District Court of Almaty region dated January 12, 2017, he was found guilty by paragraph 3) of Part 2 of Article 191 of the criminal code and sentenced to 6 years of imprisonment by partial addition of the penalties imposed by applying Part 6 of Article 58 of the criminal code on August 14, 2016, that is, before the first sentence. Therefore, the convicted person should not be recognized as a previously convicted person sentenced to imprisonment for committing a serious crime.
The sentence was changed due to incorrect recognition of recidivism in the actions of the convicted person and incorrect assignment of the regime of the Correctional Institution of the criminal control system
In this regard, the recognition of convicted Sh. in criminal activity as a repetition of crimes is unjustified. In addition, in accordance with paragraph 2) of Part 5 of Article 46 of the criminal code, persons sentenced to imprisonment for a period of more than one year for committing deliberately serious crimes are assigned to serve a sentence in a moderately safe institution of the Penal correction system. In this regard, the convicted Sh. should serve his sentence in a moderately secure institution of the Penal correction system. The Judicial Board of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan on criminal cases in respect of the convicted Sh., amending the verdict of the court of first instance, cancels the part in which the sh. recognized as having a recidivism in accordance with Part 1 of Article 14 of the criminal code, and in accordance with paragraph 2) of Part 5 of Article 46 of the criminal code, sh. is assigned to serve his sentence in a medium-safe institution of the Penal correction system. The protest of the prosecutor general of the Republic of Kazakhstan was satisfied.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
