Release from Serving of Punishment with Probation for Heavy Crowd Crimes Against Property: Problems of Court Practice

The article investigates problems of release from serving the punishment with probation for heavy sordid crimes against property. Theoretical and applied problems of accounting of the facts of the case by court are covered at the solution of a question of a possibility of the correction condemned for these crimes without serving the imposed sentence. It is noted that one of the most widespread criminal and legal measures applied for property crimes on an equal basis with punishment is release from serving the punishment with probation. On the basis of studying special literature, a conclusion is drawn that problems of application of release from serving the punishment with probation for certain types of crimes are investigated insufficiently. 1,576 judgments made by courts of Ukraine during 2006–2018, in which cases concerning convicts for heavy sordid crimes against property (in particular, according to the p. 4 of Art. 185, the p. 3 of Art. 186, the p. 2 of Art. 187, the p. 3 of Art. 190, the p. 2 of Art. 289, the p. 3 of Art. 297 of Criminal Code) resolved an issue of application of Art. 75 of CC, are studied for this purpose. Establishment of circumstances by which we characterize the seriousness of crime, the identity of the guilty person, and other facts of the case considered by courts at application (application cancellation) of Art. 75 of Criminal Code in this category of affairs became a result of the carried-out analysis. Studying of the court practice showed that release from serving the punishment with probation for heavy sordid crimes against property is applied mainly to convicts who committed a crime for the first time; in a sober state; did not cause heavy consequences; voluntarily paid sustained losses (eliminated the done harm); carried out at crime execution in partnership in an inactive (minor) role, without application of excessive violence to the victim; admitted guilt and frankly regretted; actively promoted crime detection; work (training) is positively characterized at the place of residence; work (study); have family and also support minor children or disabled parents; suffer from different diseases. Examples from court practice showed law enforcement problems in this sphere.