Research On The Nature Of Imaginative Joinder Of Offenses

Imaginative joinder of offenses refers to a special situation of crime in which an actcommits several crimes or meets several constitutions of crime. In the imaginative joinder ofoffenses, on one hand, as the object of the legal evaluation there is only one act, which seemsto show certain features of one crime, and on the other hand, as evaluation criterion of lawthere are several constitutive elements of crime, which shows features of plural crimes. It isthis special structure that leads to different conclusions when Chinese and foreign scholars ofcriminal law analyses the quantity of crime in essence under different theoretical perspectives.Therefore, it is possible and necessary to deeply study the imaginative joinder of offensestheoretically. On the surface, to study imaginative joinder of offenses is just to distinguish onecrime from plural crimes, however, in essence it is to explore the comprehensive evaluationand just punishment for an act, that is to say, to explore the comprehensiveness of convict andfairness of sentence. This essay mainly focuses on the quantity of crime in essence debate ofimaginative joinder of offenses, starting from its basic structure, then argues from threedimensions of one act, plural offence, and plural accusation, and finally derives the pluralcrime nature of imaginative joinder of offenses and the sentencing principle of concurrentpunishment.This essay consists of five parts and about forty two thousand words. The main content issummarized as follows:The first part is about the theoretical debate on the nature of imaginative joinder ofoffenses. This part mainly introduces various theories on the quantity of crime in essence ofimaginative joinder of offenses, which includes qualitative one crime, qualitative pluralcrimes, legal concurrence and the theory of eclecticism. Based on this, this part brieflyanalyses these theories and focuses on the debate between qualitative one crime andqualitative plural crimes.The second part is to interpret one act in the imaginative joinder of offenses. Based onact theory in Criminal Law, this part tries to make it clear the nature and judgment standardsof act number in imaginative joinder of offenses, in order to restore the nature of one act,which is that one factual act hides several harmful behaviors. The way of act in imaginativejoinder of offenses can be either action or omission. The third part is about the definition of plural offence in imaginative joinder of offenses.Based on deeply discussing the will level of dominant behavior, the essay judges the numberof subjective offence in imaginative joinder of offenses. Focusing on the act number ofoffence, the author thinks subjectively imaginative joinder of offenses consists of pluraloffence. One offence theory confounds between intention decision and subjective fault. Pluraloffence in imaginative joinder of offenses shows either intentionally or negligently.The forth part is to state plural accusation in imaginative joinder of offenses. Based onthe argument of various crime quantity standards’ disadvantages, this part advocates ournation’s crime constitution standard, and emphasizes the single or plural law interest.Imaginative joinder of offenses realizes violating plural accusation through plural objects.The fifth part is about the conclusion of crime quantity nature and the choice ofsentencing principle in imaginative joinder of offenses. On one hand, based on the mentionedthree dimensions and the principle of statutory crime and punishment, the author draws theconclusion that imaginative joinder of offenses is in essence plural crimes. On the other hand,through pointing out the deficiency of a heavier punishment principle, in order to obtain theappropriate sentencing, the author supports concurrent punishment principle, which shall bedistinguished from the normal combined punishment for several offenses and shall be definedas a concurrent punishment under the circumstances of concurrence.