The crime of helping information network criminal activities is not a very serious crime. According to the law, the prison term is generally less than three years. The specific sentencing depends on various circumstances, and some analysis has been done on the topic. 1. Factors affecting the judgment of this case. (a) The amount of turnover; from the perspective of the constitutive conditions of the crime of trust-facilitating, on the one hand, it is necessary to know that others are engaged in information network crimes, and on the other hand, the circumstances need to be serious. The judicial interpretations of the two Supreme Courts further quantified the criteria for conviction of the crime of facilitating credit, and provided a bank card payment settlement of 200,000 yuan to constitute the crime. But judging from the title of the question, the turnover is more than 200,000, which is just above the standard for prosecution. The judicial authorities will consider the circumstances to be minor when considering specific sentencing. In actual operation, some bank card settlements will reach several million or tens of millions. When considering sentencing, judicial organs will use the flow of water as a reference indicator, because it has indeed caused a certain degree of adverse effects and objectively helped the occurrence of illegal crimes. (2) Amount of profit; Judging from the provisions of judicial interpretations, as long as the illegal income exceeds 10,000 yuan, a case can be filed for prosecution. A client has consulted before and found that the illegal income exceeded 654.38 million yuan. The prosecutor's office recommended a sentence of two years and six months. what do I do? We have to admit that in judicial practice, illegal gains do have a great impact on sentencing. The subject of this case mentioned a profit of 30,000 yuan. Therefore, when judicial authorities consider sentencing, on the one hand, turnover is an important indicator, and on the other hand, the amount of profit will also be an important reference. Generally, the two factors will be comprehensively analyzed. (3) First-time offender issues: First-time offenders are generally not subjectively malignant and can be reformed. The personal danger and social harm are relatively small, and they can be used as discretionary circumstances for lenient punishment when sentencing. First-time offenders generally have greater advantages than repeat offenders. In handling cases, we found that judicial agencies generally crack down on repeat offenders, even if there are various favorable circumstances. It is even less possible to change the compulsory measures to release on bail pending trial. Second, the issue of whether probation is applicable. Certain conditions need to be met for probation in criminal cases. In judicial practice, as long as there is an opportunity to fight for probation, lawyers will generally present all favorable circumstances. (1) To apply for probation, the following conditions generally need to be met: 1. The crime is relatively minor; 2. There is repentance; 3. There is no risk of re-offending; 4. The declaration of probation will not have a significant adverse impact on the community where you live. In practice, as long as the sentence is less than three years, there is a possibility of probation. The above conditions are necessary conditions for the application of probation. If any one of the conditions is missing, probation will no longer be applicable. In practice, community surveys are also important. Generally, judicial organs will entrust judicial administrative organs to determine whether there is any impact on the community, and grassroots judicial offices will investigate the community. If there are no adverse effects on the community, it will generally pass. (2) Actively plead guilty and accept punishment. At present, the leniency system for pleading guilty and accepting punishment is basically applicable, which mainly solves the contradictions in a large number of cases, improves judicial efficiency, and saves judicial resources. Therefore, defenders generally guide the parties to apply this system. I once handled a case in which I communicated with the prosecutor. If the plea system is not applicable, the sentence will be one year; if the plea system is accepted, the sentence will be ten months. Judging from current judicial practice, proactively communicating with prosecutors about sentencing recommendations during the prosecution stage is a very effective method and strategy. Our current approach is to solicit opinions from all parties in advance. If you plead guilty and accept punishment, we will contact the prosecutor as soon as the case reaches the prosecutor's office and express the favorable circumstances of the case to the prosecutor in a timely manner. This communication can be in the form of telephone communication, face-to-face communication, written communication, depending on the situation. In addition, when discussing guilty pleas, lighter punishments, and sentencing, it is necessary to search for relevant judicial cases that the local court has uploaded to the Judgment Documents Network, conduct in-depth and detailed analysis, and find a judgment that is favorable to the parties involved. This is extremely beneficial for striving for lower sentencing recommendations and is also a common practice among judicial agencies. It saves them time in obtaining cases and provides a basis and reference for prosecutors to accurately determine sentencing. For example, in one case, the prosecutor may give a sentencing recommendation of one year and six months. If the sentencing in local courts is generally less than one year and six months, then after communicating with the prosecutor, it is very likely that the prosecutor will be persuaded to adopt the sentencing recommendation of the defender. (3) Actively return stolen goods. If the crime of aiding information network criminal activities has been confessed and punished, returning stolen goods is a new creative circumstance that can generally reduce the punishment, but sometimes plays an immeasurable role in the handling of specific cases. There have been cases of helping letters before. Because of the withdrawal of the stolen goods, the prosecutor's office directly changed the sentencing recommendation from ten months to seven months. This is the benefit of taking the initiative to return the stolen goods. If the stolen goods were returned after the verdict, this would not have such an effect.
Profitable courts will also require refunds in their judgments, and there will also be fines. As for the stage of returning stolen money and stolen goods, since the stolen money must be returned sooner or later, it will become more and more difficult as the criminal case proceeds, so it is wiser to return it as soon as possible. For example, during the investigation stage, the investigation agency may issue a bail pending trial, or during the review and prosecution stage, the procuratorate may decide that detention is not necessary and make a decision not to approve the arrest. Some investigators will directly tell the defense lawyer how much they will get if the stolen goods are returned, such as being released on bail or continuing to be detained, or how much the sentence will be reduced. However, some judicial officers will not tell you clearly directly, and some circumstances may be discussed. Third, actively seeking not to prosecute after returning the stolen goods is also an important defense direction. Non-prosecution means that the People's Procuratorate decides not to transfer the case to the People's Court for trial and ends the litigation after reviewing the case.
Legal basis:
Article 177 of the "Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China" If the People's Procuratorate believes that the criminal suspect should not be held criminally responsible according to law, it shall decide not to prosecute Decision; if the crime is minor and does not need to be sentenced or exempted from punishment in accordance with the provisions of the criminal law, the People's Procuratorate may make a decision not to prosecute; if the People's Procuratorate still believes that the evidence is insufficient and does not meet the conditions for prosecution, it may make a decision not to prosecute. It can be seen from the above that criminal cases that have constituted a crime, but the circumstances are minor, can be tried without prosecution. The first thing to do in this case is to actively return profits, which is the basic condition. After returning, communicate with the prosecutor the specific favorable circumstances of the case, such as confession and repentance, confession, first offense, subjective malignancy, etc. Criminal cases are divided into three distinct stages: investigation, prosecution and trial. It is important to do a good job at each stage, and it is important to strive for probation during the probationary stage. The prosecutor's office can only recommend that the prosecutor make a recommendation for probation. If the case is not prosecuted, it means that the case is over when it reaches the prosecutor's office. No one can be found guilty without a trial in court, so it is equivalent to an acquittal. In view of this, it is extremely important for the parties not to prosecute during the review and prosecution stage. We have an illegal detention case on hand. During the review and prosecution stage, when the case goes to the procuratorate for review and prosecution, we immediately submit a legal opinion on non-prosecution to the prosecutor, detailing the reasons for not prosecuting. The prosecutor made no recommendations because he didn't study the file carefully, complaining that our lawyers were too eager to follow up. We explained that the client was looking forward to and anxious in the detention center, and was actively performing his duties. A few days later, all the procuratorate’s non-prosecution decisions were retrieved and mailed to the responsible prosecutor as soon as possible, informing the prosecutor that cases less severe than ours would not be prosecuted. The prosecutor complained to the lawyers from the beginning and slowly and patiently listened to our opinions. Tell us that we have carefully studied the legal opinions and related cases we submitted, and in short there is still hope. I often think that a lawyer’s duty is to go all out to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the client within the scope of the law. If I had been waiting at the prosecutor's office for the prosecutor to take the initiative to consult a lawyer, it would probably be too late and the prosecutor would not do so. Lawyers should be proactive. According to the law, the time for review and prosecution is one month, or it may be half a month, and the case will be transferred. Therefore, there is no problem in following up as soon as possible, just in case. For the benefit of the client, lawyers should not worry too much.