Medgärningsmannaskap eller ej - Förutsättningar för rubricering i medgärningsmannaskap och en redogörelse för tillämpningen i rättspraxis

Detta är en Kandidat-uppsats från Lunds universitet/Juridiska institutionen; Lunds universitet/Juridiska fakulteten

Författare: Marcus Carlsson; [2018]

Nyckelord: Straffrätt; Law and Political Science;

Sammanfattning: This essay deals with the necessary requirements to convict a participant in a crime as an offender instead of an accomplice. The essay also examines how the courts have judged in practice and the reasons for that. A participant in a crime is convicted as an offender together with other participants in the following cases. First of all, when the participant together with other participants perform the crime. Secondly, when the participant is aiding the offenders and is crucial for the crime’s execution. The courts practice has on this matter been criticized for being too extensive. This means that aiders have been convicted as offenders despite that they have been less active than the offenders. A reason for that is that the courts have tried to sustain efficiency in the judicial proceedings. Often has the reasoning been indistinct when presenting the circumstances that explains why a participant is considered as an offender. The ruling in ”Akallarånet” is considered important because it clarifies when a participant should be convicted as an offender or as an accomplice. In the analytic section the essay deals with the necessary requirements to convict a participant as an offender. A participant is convicted as an offender when the participant together with other participants perform the crime. A participant is also convicted as an offender when the participant has been contributing both during the preparation to commit the crime and during its execution. It is necessary that the participant has been crucial during either the execution or the preparation. The analytic section also deals with important elements which indicates conviction as an offender. Furthermore it is concluded that there is to some extent agreement in the doctrine that the courts practice has been extensive after ”Lindomefallet” when considering a participant as an offender, this because of effectiveness in the courts. The ruling in ”Akallarånet” limited the possibilities to consider a participant as an offender. In the matter of rule of law, it is problematic when the court does not account for the circumstances that explains why a participant is considered as an offender. The ruling in Akallarånet might remedy this.

  HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)