Qualification of the error in the determination of the subjective side of crime and their classification

Purpose: Analysis of qualification mistakes made by law enforcement officers in determining the characteristics of the subjective side of the crime, their classification. Methodology: Comparative legal and formal legal methods were used. Results: On the basis of the analysis of the legislation, scientific literature and judicial practice (empirical base of researches made over 1100 sentences and other judicial decisions made in 2004-2018), qualification mistakes connected with incorrect determination of signs of the subjective party of crime, types of intention and negligence, their structural elements are classified, their influence on judicial practice is shown. According to the results of the conducted researches, it is proposed to classify qualification errors in determining the signs of the subjective side of the crime into the following groups: 1) Related to the incorrect definition of the form of guilt, types of intent or negligence or their non-designation; 2) Arising from the improper definition of the purpose and motive of the crime or their non-designation, in cases where the latter have a qualifying value; 3) Caused by discrepancy between the types of intention and negligence specified in the sentence and the description of their intellectual and strong-willed elements; 4) Related to the indication in the sentence of specific types of intent (negligence), which by virtue of the law or the decision of the Plenum of the RF armed forces are not applicable to this type or stage of committing crimes (for example, an unfinished crime committed in complicity with different degrees of co-execution, etc.). Mistakes in the qualification of individual crime connected with the fact that law enforcement officers do not always take into account that the period from the moment of occurrence to the end of the subjective side of the crime in time does not always coincide, and often exceeds the period of Commission of socially dangerous act. For example, the purpose and motive of the crime may arise long before the Commission of a socially dangerous act, the intention to deprive life may be evidenced by the relationship between the perpetrator and the victim before and after the Commission of the crime. In terms of improving the legislation, it is proposed to exclude from part 3 of article 25 of the criminal code, revealing the indirect intent, the phrase»did not want». Novelty/originality/value: The Work is one of the first, which offers a detailed classification of qualification errors related to the subjective side of the crime, shows the reasons for their occurrence, a proposal to amend article 25 of the criminal code.