Pick-pocketing In Criminal Law

Pick-pocketing is an illegal act which causes intense reaction and large social anger. Because of the proceeds of crime does not enough to consist of the clause of larceny in criminal law, and only can be penalized with Public Security Administration Punishment Law before2011, the punishment of the pick-pocketing is inadequate, and which is difficult to prohibit. In May,2011, Criminal Law Amendment eighth is officially announced, which amend the264th clause of larceny in<criminal law> of china. The Criminal Law Amendment eighth only enumerated the vacant accusation, does not defined of the qualification and amount of guilty, so that lead to many difficulty. Meanwhile, it provides widely spaces for the researches of the academia.Pick-pocketing has subjective viciousness, which greatly harmful to the society, brings a lot of trouble to police organization. The incrimination of Pick-pocketing is not only reflecting the Constitution and the law’s protection of the people’s property rights and public safety, but also reflect the respect of natural person’s individual life, and reduced the criminal behavior. Seen from the judicial practice, mostly pick-pocketing has been incriminated; the number of cases appears decline. But there are some problems and disputes in the identification of pick-pocketing.The paper argues that pick-pocketing is a sort of theft essentially and the secret is one of its essential characters; public places is not the prerequisites to identify the pick-pocketing, and its occurring doesn’t limited into public places; originally, pick-pocketing contained the behavior that stolen from the victim’s body, so the target is somebody’s close carrying property, and the explaining of "close carrying " must obey its original meaning, can not expanded its meaning; whether carrying lethal weapons could makes different standards when sentencing, but not the standards of form of crime or not form of crime, both of which should not be confused; Like common theft, which have its accomplished forms, as a type of theft, pick-pocketing should equal with the common theft, and have the form of attempted crime.In the current judicial practice, the incrimination of pick-pocketing has some practice difficult, especially in the aspect of convicted standard and convicted amount. The paper argues that, pick-pocketing in accordance with the characteristics of consequential offense, the penalty should follow the principle of objective and subjective agreement and consider the harm of legal interests. At the same time,the " Proviso" in the general provisions of the criminal law has the guidance function, can not be ignored. The amount standard of pick-pocketing’s incrimination should be established via judicial interpretation, in order to guide the judicial practice.The paper argues that the penalty standard of pick-pocketing should compare to the common theft, refer to the relevant judicial interpretations, and then establish "three-layer sentencing penalty"; it ought to reasonable determined that the penalty of attempted act in pick-pocketing should combine two aspects:the subjective culpability of the mind and objective aspects. While in the case of the proceeds of crime did not reach the penalty standards, some who in deep subjective malignant and adverse circumstances could be penalized with attempted crime; the penalty in pick-pocketing both have accomplished and attempted form, should identify its proceeds of crime in accomplished offense form, and make the part of attempted crime as the consideration of measurement of penalty, give a heavier penalty in the range of accomplished form, some pick-pocketing in minor plot and mild subjective malignant, which could not constitute a crime, should implement administrative penalty; based on "the punishment no longer" principle, The amount of repeated illegal administrative punishment should not cumulate and sum to the convicted standard of criminal penalties, but it could be the measurement of criminal punishment.