The crime of assisting criminal activities in information networks is not a very serious crime. According to the law, the sentencing is generally less than three years. The specific sentencing depends on various circumstances. Do some research on the topic. analyze. 1. Regarding the factors affecting sentencing in this case. (1) Amount of turnover. From the perspective of the constitutive conditions of the crime of trust, on the one hand, it must be knowing that others are engaged in information network crimes, and on the other hand, the circumstances must be serious. The judicial interpretations of the two high authorities have further quantified the criteria for the crime of trust, stipulating This crime can be constituted if the bank card payment settlement reaches 200,000 yuan. But from the perspective of the subject's problem, the turnover was more than 200,000 yuan, which just exceeded the standard for prosecution. This is a consideration when sentencing. Judicial authorities will consider the circumstances to be minor. In case handling practice, we have seen that some bank card settlement amounts can reach several million or tens of millions of yuan. When considering sentencing, judicial authorities will consider excessive turnover. The amount is used as a reference index because it will indeed cause a certain degree of adverse effects and objectively contribute to 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. Previously, a client asked the author what to do if the illegal income exceeded 100,000 yuan. The sentencing recommendation given by the procuratorate was 2 years and 6 months. It has to be admitted that in judicial practice, illegal income has a great impact on sentencing. In this case, the profit mentioned by the parties is 30,000 yuan. When considering sentencing, the judicial authorities will use turnover as an important indicator on the one hand, and the amount of profit as an important reference on the other. Generally, these two factors will be combined. Get up and analyze. (3) First offense problem. First-time offenders are generally not subjectively malignant and can be reformed. The personal danger and social harm are relatively small, and can be used as circumstances for leniency in sentencing. Compared with recidivists, first-time offenders generally have greater advantages. When we handle cases, judicial authorities will generally crack down on recidivists once they are discovered, even if there are various favorable circumstances. It is even more impossible to change the compulsory measure to release on bail pending trial. Second, there is the issue of whether probation is applicable. Certain conditions need to be met to apply for probation in criminal cases. In judicial practice, whenever there is an opportunity to fight for probation, lawyers will usually present various favorable circumstances one by one. (1) To apply for probation, the following conditions generally need to be met: 1. The crime is relatively minor; 2. There is remorse; 3. There is no risk of re-offending; 4. The declaration of probation will have no major adverse impact on the community where one lives. In practice, as long as the sentence is less than three years, it is possible to be sentenced to probation. The above conditions are necessary conditions for the application of probation. If any one of the conditions is missing, probation cannot be applied again. Community surveys are also very important in practice. Generally, judicial agencies will entrust the judicial administrative agencies to determine whether there is any impact on the community. Grassroots judicial offices will conduct surveys in the communities where they are located. If there are no adverse factors affecting the community, they will generally be approved. (2) A leniency system for those who plead guilty and accept punishment. The leniency system for pleading guilty and accepting punishment is basically applicable to all cases. It is mainly to solve the problem of many cases and few cases, improve judicial efficiency, and save judicial resources. Therefore, defenders generally guide the parties to apply this system. The author once handled a case and worked with the prosecutor According to the official communication, if the leniency system for pleading guilty and accepting punishment is not applicable, the sentence will be one year, and if the leniency system for pleading guilty and accepting punishment is accepted, the sentence will be ten months. Judging from current judicial practice, it is a very effective method and strategy to actively communicate with the prosecutor on sentencing recommendations during the prosecution stage. Our current approach is that after soliciting the opinions of the parties concerned, if the parties plead guilty, we will contact the prosecutor handling the case as soon as possible after the procuratorial organ arrives at the case, and promptly express any favorable circumstances to the case to the prosecutor handling the case. This communication can take the form of telephone communication, face-to-face communication, written communication, etc., depending on the circumstances of the case. In addition, when talking about leniency and sentencing for guilty pleas and punishments, it is necessary to search relevant judicial cases that have been uploaded by local courts to the Judgment Documents Network, conduct in-depth and detailed analysis, and find out sentencing methods that are beneficial to the parties concerned. This is extremely beneficial in seeking to lower sentencing recommendations, and is also a more popular approach for judicial authorities. It not only saves them time in searching for cases, but also provides the prosecutor with a basis and reference for accurate sentencing. For example, in a case, the prosecutor's office may give a sentencing recommendation of one year and six months. If the local court generally sentences a sentence of less than one year and six months, then after communicating with the prosecutor's office, it is possible to persuade the prosecutor The agency adopted the sentencing recommendation from the defender. (3) Actively return stolen goods.
If you have pleaded guilty to the crime of helping to teach information network criminal activities, and returning the stolen goods is a new circumstance, you can generally get a lighter punishment, but in specific case handling, it sometimes plays an immeasurable role. Previously, there was a criminal case involving trusting people. Because of the withdrawal of the stolen goods, the prosecutorial agency directly changed the sentencing recommendation from ten months to seven months. This is the advantage of taking the initiative to withdraw the stolen goods. If the verdict was to withdraw the stolen property, it would not have such an effect. If there is a profit, the court will also require the return of the stolen goods in the judgment, as well as a fine. Regarding the question of at which stage to return stolen goods, since profits must be returned sooner or later, it is recommended to return them as early as possible, because criminal cases become more difficult to handle as they go forward. For example, if the stolen goods are returned during the investigation stage, the investigating agency may apply for bail pending trial, or the procuratorate may decide that detention is not necessary during the prosecution stage and decide not to approve the arrest. This is both possible. Some case investigators will directly tell the defense lawyer how much the sentence will be reduced if the stolen goods are returned, such as whether the person is released on bail pending trial or continues to be detained. However, some judicial officers will not tell you clearly directly, and some situations may be discussed during the meeting. Third, actively striving not to prosecute after the stolen goods are returned is also an important defense direction. Non-prosecution refers to the decision made by the People's Procuratorate not to transfer the case to the People's Court for trial and to terminate the proceedings when reviewing the prosecution.
Legal basis:
Article 177 of the "Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China and the State" If the People's Procuratorate believes that the criminal suspect should not be held criminally responsible according to law , a decision should be made not to prosecute; for cases where the crime is minor and there is no need to impose a penalty or be exempted from punishment in accordance with the criminal law, the People's Procuratorate may make a decision not to prosecute; for cases under supplementary investigation, the People's Procuratorate still believes that the evidence is insufficient and does not meet the conditions for prosecution. A decision not to prosecute may be made. It can be seen from the above that it is possible to fight for non-prosecution in criminal cases that have constituted a crime but the circumstances are minor. In this case, the first thing to do is to actively return the stolen goods. This is the basic condition. After returning the case, communicate with the prosecutor the specific favorable circumstances of the case, such as confession and repentance, confession, first offender, occasional offender, lack of subjective malignancy, etc. Criminal cases are divided into three different stages: investigation, prosecution, and trial. It is crucial to do the work well at each stage. Striving for probation is an important task at the trial stage, and the procuratorial organ can only recommend that the prosecutor make suggestions for probation. And if there is no prosecution, it means that the case ends when it reaches the procuratorate. No one can be found guilty without a court trial, which is equivalent to an acquittal. In view of this, it is particularly important to strive for non-prosecution during the review and prosecution stage. We have an illegal detention case at hand. During the review and prosecution stage, after the case went to the procuratorate for review and prosecution, we immediately submitted a legal opinion to the prosecutor not to prosecute, detailing the reasons for not prosecuting. The prosecutor did not study it carefully. It was difficult to give an opinion on the file, and we complained that our lawyers were too anxious to follow up. We explained that the client was waiting eagerly in the detention center and had to be anxious. He was also actively performing his duties. A few days later, the procuratorate withdrew all the non-prosecution decisions and immediately mailed them to the prosecutor in charge, informing the prosecutor that they would not prosecute anyone with more serious circumstances than us. The prosecutor went from being too anxious to keep up with the lawyer's complaint to slowly and patiently listening to our opinions. He told us that he carefully studied the legal opinions and related cases we submitted, and there is still hope. I often think that a lawyer’s duty is to do his best to protect the legitimate rights and interests of his clients within the scope of the law. If you just wait for the prosecutor to take the initiative to go to the procuratorate to seek advice from a lawyer, it will probably be too late, and the prosecutor will not do so. Lawyers still have to take the initiative. According to the law, the time for review and prosecution is one month, and the case may be transferred in half a month. Therefore, just in case, there is no problem in following up as soon as possible. For the interests of the client, lawyers should not worry too much.