2020
DOI: 10.32850/sulj.2020.1.4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Теоретичні Та Законодавчі Особливості Застосування Форм Прогресивної Системи Виконання Та Відбування Покарання У Вигляді Позбавлення Волі

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Firstly, the process of sentence enforcement in the form of deprivation of freedom for determined period has the highest degree of legal regulation, compared to the other types of punishments, and is applied to a significant number of persons guilty of criminal offenses. In particular, according to court statistics, in 2011 44,201 persons were sentenced to deprivation of freedom for determined period in the state (that was 28.64% of the total number of convicts), in 2012 there were 42,938 persons (26.36%), in 2013 there were 30,479 persons (24.79%), in 2014 there were 20,872 persons (20.43%), in 2015 there were 19,765 persons (21.0%), in 2016 there were 16,140 persons (21.2%), in 2017 there were 16,143 persons (21.2%), in 2018 there were 13,765 persons (18.7%) 1 . Despite the dynamics of reducing the number of convicts, this type of punishment is firmly in the "top three" of criminal sanctions for committing criminal offenses (after such sanctions as: release from probation and a fine, occupying the first and second positions, accordingly).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Firstly, the process of sentence enforcement in the form of deprivation of freedom for determined period has the highest degree of legal regulation, compared to the other types of punishments, and is applied to a significant number of persons guilty of criminal offenses. In particular, according to court statistics, in 2011 44,201 persons were sentenced to deprivation of freedom for determined period in the state (that was 28.64% of the total number of convicts), in 2012 there were 42,938 persons (26.36%), in 2013 there were 30,479 persons (24.79%), in 2014 there were 20,872 persons (20.43%), in 2015 there were 19,765 persons (21.0%), in 2016 there were 16,140 persons (21.2%), in 2017 there were 16,143 persons (21.2%), in 2018 there were 13,765 persons (18.7%) 1 . Despite the dynamics of reducing the number of convicts, this type of punishment is firmly in the "top three" of criminal sanctions for committing criminal offenses (after such sanctions as: release from probation and a fine, occupying the first and second positions, accordingly).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%