An Empirical Analysis Of The Judicial Application Of Transformative Robbery

Article 269 of the criminal law stipulates that whoever commits the crime of theft,fraud or robbery and uses violence or threats of violence on the spot in order to hide stolen goods,resist arrest or destroy criminal evidence shall be convicted and punished for robbery.This is a kind of legal fiction,which is defined as transformed robbery by some scholars.The crime of transformed robbery has experienced thousands of years from its emergence to the more mature legislative provisions,but due to the lag of the law itself,it has been unable to keep up with the development and changes of the reality,resulting in a lot of disputes on the relevant issues of the crime in the judicial and theoretical circles.In order to meet the practical needs,the provision still needs to be improved.Through the "alpha legal intelligent operating system",various data of transformed robbery cases handled nationwide from 2014 to2020 are retrieved.From the data analysis,it is known that the rate of appeal,second instance and retrial of transformed robbery cases is high.In order to find out the reasons,we analyzed the similar cases we had contacted,and found that Li was suspected of robbery,because the judges,prosecutors and parties had different understanding of the following three controversial focus issues of transformational robbery: 1 Whether the prior act of transformed robbery has the amount requirement;2.Whether the violence or threat of violence of transformed robbery has serious requirements;3.Whether there is an attempted crime in the criminal form of transformed robbery,resulting in the procuratorate bringing a public prosecution to the court on Mr.Li’s suspicion of robbery.After the court hearing,the court proposed to the procuratorate to withdraw the prosecution.Finally,the procuratorate withdrew the prosecution and made a decision not to prosecute Mr.Li.In order to confirm whether the focus of dispute in this case is typical,we searched the cases of transformational robbery handled by the procuratorate and the court from 2014 to2020 through websites such as China judicial document network,Baidu and Jianda.It was found that there are many inconsistencies in the determination of charges and sentencing of the same fact between the procuratorate and the court and between the court due to the different recognition of the above three focus of dispute in judicial practice,Therefore,it is determined that the robbery crime of Li Moumou is studied as a typical case.Focusing on the three controversial focuses,through the methods of empirical research,case analysis and comparative analysis,this paper compares and analyzes the rationality and shortcomings of various views held by scholars in the theoretical circle,combined with the judicial practice and precedents,closely adheres to the essential characteristics and legislative intent of the crime of transformed robbery,and clearly puts forward the following views: 1 The precondition of transformed robbery is to carry out theft,fraud or robbery;2.The necessary condition for the crime of robbery is that the perpetrator commits violence or threats of violence against the owner,holder,custodian or catcher of the property in order to destroy the evidence on the spot,resist arrest and hide the stolen goods;3.The criminal form of transformed robbery has the form of attempted robbery.Finally,in order to solve the problems of the application of law in judicial practice and different judgments in the same case,it is suggested to improve the legal provisions of transformed robbery,make further judicial interpretation on the application of law,make up for the gap or make the vague point of view clearer.