"Well, according to the provisions of the "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Law in Handling Voluntary Surrender and Meritorious Service", the voluntary surrender of a criminal suspect includes three situations: 1. The criminal suspect voluntarily surrenders; 2. The criminal suspect surrendered under the persuasion or accompaniment of relatives or friends; 3. Sent by relatives and friends to surrender. Fang Yi said.

"Lawyer Fang, according to you, my son should belong to the second category and surrender under the persuasion of relatives and friends." Geng Kunshan Road.

"After you listen to me, the first situation is that the criminal suspect goes to the public security organ to surrender himself, which is easier to understand; The third situation is that relatives and friends send the criminal suspect to the public security organ to surrender himself, which is also easier to distinguish. The point is the second scenario.

In the second case, the suspect must have actually committed the act of surrendering, or must be preparing to surrender, or be in the process of surrendering.

If the criminal suspect only expresses his intention to surrender, but does not actually surrender or cannot clearly prove that he is ready to surrender, it cannot be found to have surrendered.

In this case, your son, Geng Di, fled to his uncle's house after the crime, and under his uncle's questioning, he told the murder and agreed to turn himself in under the persuasion of his uncle. This can only show that he has expressed his intention to surrender.

Later, his uncle was worried that Geng Di would regret it, so he secretly reported the case, and the public security organs arrested Geng Di.

Although your son Geng Di has expressed his intention to surrender, he did not directly go to the public security organ to surrender, nor did he entrust his uncle to surrender on his behalf, and his uncle did not send him to surrender after reporting the case, which means that Geng Di did not surrender, so according to the provisions of the law, Geng Di's behavior cannot be found to be voluntary surrender. Fang Yi explained.

"Huh?! So my son is definitely going to be sentenced to death? Geng Kunshan panicked.

"Not necessarily.

Although there was a risk that Geng Di's behavior would not be recognized as surrendering, Geng Di's uncle Geng Kunshui actively persuaded Geng Di to surrender and took the initiative to report the case, and Geng Di was able to truthfully confess the facts of the crime after being brought into the case.

I think it is impossible for the Provincial High Court not to take it into account when adjudicating the case, and it is very likely that the punishment will be mitigated and the original verdict will be upheld. Because only in this way can we win the active cooperation of the relatives of criminals and achieve better social results. Fang Yi said.

"Oh, so my son still has a chance to live!" Geng Kunshan's heart was a little more steady.

"But this case is really not easy to handle, the facts of the case are very clear, there are still risks, I can't give you any guarantees." Fang Yi said.

"Well, understood! Anyway, the procuratorate has already protested, and I definitely can't let my son wait for death, even if there is a glimmer of hope, I will try. Geng Kunshan nodded.

sent Geng Kunshan away, and in the next few days, Fang Yi took Zhou Ying to the detention center and the court, and was busy for a while.

Two days later, in Fang Yi's office, Zhou Ying wrote down all the key information about Geng Di's murder case on the whiteboard. Fang Yi sat on the sofa next to him, drinking tea. Tian Xin sat aside, holding a book and a pen, listening.

Huang Yuanchao does not do criminal cases, Tian Xin heard that Fang Yi received a death penalty case, so he asked Zhou Ying to greet Fang Yi, and wanted to come over to listen and learn.

"How should the defendant Geng Di's act of intentionally killing and then taking the opportunity to steal the victim's property be characterized? Tian Xin, you are also involved, say boldly, don't be afraid of mistakes. Fang Yi took a sip of tea, put down the teacup and asked.

"I think the court of first instance ruled that there is no problem, the defendant Geng Di's behavior is a murder of passion, and taking the victim's property is a follow-up act to the killing, and it should be dealt with in accordance with the principle of heavy acts absorbing light acts, and only the crime of intentional homicide is convicted." Tian Xin said.

Yesterday afternoon, she discussed the case with Zhou Ying for an afternoon, and felt that there was nothing wrong with the court's decision.

"Where's Zhou Ying?" Fang Yi looked at Zhou Ying.

"Although the court of first instance convicted him of intentional homicide, I believe that Geng Di's purpose in going to the victim's house was for money, and he already had the psychology of seeking money, and his act of stealing property after killing the victim constituted the crime of robbery."

"Lawyer Fang, what do you think?" Tian Xin asked.

"I think differently from you, I think that after Geng Di killed someone, he robbed property and then constituted intentional homicide and theft, respectively." Fang Yi said.

"Why?" Tian Xin and Zhou Ying asked at the same time.

"Let me tell you what I think.

According to the Reply of the Supreme People's Court on the Issue of How to Convict Cases of Intentional Homicide in the Process of Robbery (Fa Shi [2001] No. 16), if the perpetrator premeditates intentional homicide in order to steal property, or intentionally kills in order to subdue the victim's resistance in the process of robbing property, it shall be convicted and punished as the crime of robbery. Where, after committing robbery, the perpetrator intentionally kills people in order to silence his mouth, he is to be convicted of the crimes of robbery and intentional homicide, and punishment for multiple crimes is to be combined.

According to the above-mentioned reply, the condition for the crime of robbery to be constituted is that the perpetrator first had the purpose of stealing the property, and then used the means of intentional homicide. The perpetrator intentionally kills for the purpose of robbing property.

If the perpetrator did not commit the murder for the purpose of robbing property, but temporarily took the victim's property after the killing, then there is no relationship between the previous act of killing and the subsequent act of taking property, and the act was carried out for different purposes, it cannot be found to be the crime of robbery, but should be found to be intentional homicide and theft respectively.

Let's go back and look at this case, the defendant Geng Di originally went to the victim's house to borrow money, and the evidence in the case does not prove that Geng Di had the intention and purpose of robbing property.

When Geng Di's lie was revealed by the victim, he became angry and angry, and the two sides fought after that. In the course of the fight, the defendant hacked the victim to death.

It can be seen from this that when the defendant Geng Di first arrived at the victim's house, he only wanted to make up an excuse to borrow money, and there was no purpose to kill or rob property.

After the killing, the victim Geng Di took the victim's property, and his intention to illegally take possession of the victim's property arose after the killing.

It can be seen from this that there is no criminal law causal relationship between the defendant Geng Di's homicide and the subsequent robbery of the victim's property, so Geng Di's act of taking money after the murder does not constitute the crime of robbery.

Defendant Geng Di's act of taking money after killing people was two separate acts carried out under the intentional control of two different crimes, and was not part of the homicide act, and could not be absorbed by the homicide, and should be separately defined as the crime of theft.

Therefore, Geng Di's actions should constitute the crime of intentional homicide and theft respectively, and should be punished concurrently. Fang Yi explained.

"Lawyer Fang, if this is the case, will the Provincial High Court change the sentence to a combined punishment for several crimes?" Zhou Ying asked.

"No, it won't. In this case, although the public prosecution accused Geng Di of the fact that after killing someone, he also seized a huge amount of property from the victim, but did not charge Geng Di's conduct to constitute another crime of theft.

According to the principle of not suing and ignoring the crime, the court of second instance will generally not directly add the determination of this crime during the trial, so it is possible that the criminal law will eventually be sentenced for intentional homicide in this case. Fang Yi said.

After hearing this, Tian Xin was skeptical, but Zhou Ying did not have the slightest doubt.

(End of chapter)