The basis of intentional crimes is the criminal’s will. A person who does not dominate his/her behavior should not be punished legally. One’s awareness to the element and circumstances of the crime, which is usually mentioned in the legal definition of crimes and is a part of the actus reus, is not an exception to this rule. Punishing the accused is justified only when his/her awareness of the circumstances and the knowledge of the consequences is proved. These circumstances are sometimes confused with the conditions known as the "aggravating circumstances". In addition, there is a widespread disagreement about the impact of science on aggravated qualities in criminal law and doctrine. There are no specific procedures in the criminal law and doctrine regarding to the provision of a criterion for distinguishing between these two types of conditions, and the necessity of intention of the aggravating circumstances. While aggravating circumstances, and the necessity of intention may have a significant impact on criminal liability. In this article, the criteria for distinguishing between these two types of conditions is offered, in addition to noticing the suitable level of the aggravated punishment. Based on the general principles of criminal law, and according to Article 155 of the Islamic Penal Code and the judicial procedure in the United States, the necessity for intention to aggravating circumstances of crime, is strengthened for increasing criminal liability.
شمسالائمه سرخسی (483 ق)، محمد بن احمد، المبسوط، جلد 9، بیروت: دارالمعرفه.
مقدس اردبیلی، احمد بن محمد (1403 ق)، مجمع الفائده و البرهان فی شرح إرشاد الأذهان، جلد 13، قم: موسسه نشر اسلامی.
موسوی گلپایگانی، سید محمدرضا (1415 ق)، تقریرات الحدود و التعزیرات، جلد 1، دار العاصمة للنشر و التوزیع الطبعه.
لاتین
Bohlander, Michael (2009), Studies in International and Comparative Criminal Law, vol. 2(Principles of German Criminal Law), Canada: Hart Publishing.
Calkinst, Lindsay (2000), Is Drug Quantity an Element of 21 USC § 841(b)? Determining the Apprendi Statutory Maximum, The University of Chicago Law Review; Chicago Vol. 78, Iss. 3.
E. Ross, Jacqueline (2000), Unanticipated Consequences of Turning Sentencing Factors into Offense Elements: The Apprendi Debate, Federal Sentencing Reporter, Vol. 12, No. 4.
Singer, Richard (2000), The Model Penal Code and Three Two (Possibly Only One) Ways Courts Avoid Mens Rea, Buffalo Criminal Law Review, Vol. 4, No.1.
Singer, Richard, D. knoll, Mark (2000), Elements and Sentencing Factors: A Reassessment of the Alleged Distinction, Federal Sentencing Reporter, Vol. 12, No. 4.
آرای قضایی
McMillan v. Pennsylvania: 477 U.S. 79 (1986).
Apprendi v. New Jersey: 530 U.S. 466 (2000).
United States v. Alberta, 1235-36 (1996).
Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S._ (2013).
Harris v. United States, 536 U.S. 545 (2002).
Southern Union Co. v. United States, 567 U.S. 343 (2012).
Mirkamali,A. and Abdollahi Neysiani,M. (2020). Aggravating Circumstances & The necessity of “Intention” Towards its Realization. The Judiciarys Law Journal, 84(109), 171-190. doi: 10.22106/jlj.2020.105975.2662
MLA
Mirkamali,A. , and Abdollahi Neysiani,M. . "Aggravating Circumstances & The necessity of “Intention” Towards its Realization", The Judiciarys Law Journal, 84, 109, 2020, 171-190. doi: 10.22106/jlj.2020.105975.2662
HARVARD
Mirkamali A., Abdollahi Neysiani M. (2020). 'Aggravating Circumstances & The necessity of “Intention” Towards its Realization', The Judiciarys Law Journal, 84(109), pp. 171-190. doi: 10.22106/jlj.2020.105975.2662
CHICAGO
A. Mirkamali and M. Abdollahi Neysiani, "Aggravating Circumstances & The necessity of “Intention” Towards its Realization," The Judiciarys Law Journal, 84 109 (2020): 171-190, doi: 10.22106/jlj.2020.105975.2662
VANCOUVER
Mirkamali A., Abdollahi Neysiani M. Aggravating Circumstances & The necessity of “Intention” Towards its Realization. The Judiciarys Law Journal, 2020; 84(109): 171-190. doi: 10.22106/jlj.2020.105975.2662