Tipicidad 1° parte. Clasificación tipos penales

Understanding Criminal Conduct and Legal Typicity

The Concept of Typicity in Criminal Law

• After verifying the existence of a specific conduct, it is essential to determine if that conduct is typical, meaning it meets the criteria of typicity.

• The term "tipo penal" (penal type) originates from the German expression "Tatbestand," which refers to a factual assumption. It encompasses elements characterizing behaviors deemed illegal by law, such as homicide or theft.

• Criminal law is fragmentary; not all human behaviors are considered criminal but only a selection. Each selected behavior must be verified against specific legal requirements to establish typicity.

Distinction Between Penal Types and Legal Articles

• Each penal figure (crime type) has distinct requirements. If these are not met for one crime, we check for others like theft or robbery.

• This verification aligns with the principle of legality, which mandates that human conduct must be predefined as criminal before its commission, along with corresponding penalties.

• Typicity describes the characteristics of conduct while "tipo penal" refers to the established factual assumptions in law. They should not be confused with articles in the penal code.

Clarifying Penal Types and Code Articles

• While most penal types are found within articles of the penal code, some articles do not contain any penal type at all; they may describe general provisions instead.

• Some articles can include multiple penal types; for instance, Article 80 contains various forms of aggravated homicide across its numerous clauses.

Elements Within Penal Types

• Within each penal type, there are descriptive and normative elements. Descriptive elements can be perceived through senses (e.g., identifying a person), while normative elements require interpretation (e.g., understanding what constitutes a cheque).

• Understanding this distinction between descriptive and normative elements is crucial for grasping typicity since it affects how knowledge about these elements is assessed legally.

Subjective Typicity and Knowledge Requirements

• Normative elements necessitate specific interpretations—legal or cultural—to understand their implications fully.

• The concept of "dolus" (intent), particularly regarding knowledge of objective elements, requires consideration of both descriptive and normative distinctions.

• A person committing an offense does not need expert legal knowledge; rather, they only need parallel comprehension within their own sphere regarding normative concepts like cheques.

Understanding Legal Concepts: Cheques and Penal Norms

The Importance of Legal Knowledge on Cheques

• Understanding the legal concept of a cheque is crucial, particularly in relation to penal types and typicity. It’s important not to confuse the penal type with the description of prohibited conduct.

• The penal type consists of elements that describe prohibited behavior, while the penal norm exists beneath the written law, indicating what is implicitly forbidden.

Distinction Between Penal Type and Penal Norm

• The code defines behaviors such as murder or theft directly; however, underlying these definitions are legal norms that convey prohibitions against actions like killing or stealing.

• Criminals often comply with the code by engaging in exactly what it prohibits, which leads to consequences such as sanctions for their actions.

Prohibitive vs. Permissive Types

• A distinction exists between prohibitive types (describing criminally prohibited conduct) and permissive types (situations where typically prohibited conduct may be allowed).

• Permissive types can include justifications found within or outside the penal code, allowing certain actions under specific circumstances.

Analyzing Conduct Against Penal Types

• When analyzing a case, one must verify if an action intuitively considered typical meets all requirements set forth by its corresponding penal type.

• For instance, if there is a shooting incident resulting in death, one must constantly relate this situation back to the definition of homicide outlined in Article 79.

Classifications of Penal Types

• Before delving into objective and subjective types (to be discussed later), it's essential to classify penal types for better understanding during analysis.

• The primary classification divides them into active (committed through action) and omissive (committed through omission), with further distinctions into intentional (doloso) and negligent (culposo).

Understanding Active and Omissive Crimes

Definition of Human Conduct in Criminal Law

• Human conduct involves active actions by an individual that result in a causal relationship, particularly relevant in the context of crimes defined as purely active.

• In cases of omission, it is crucial to differentiate between mere inactivity and a failure to fulfill a legal obligation; for instance, not assisting someone who is drowning constitutes a crime of omission.

Types of Crimes: Active vs. Omissive

• Crimes can be categorized as either dolosos (intentional) or culposos (negligent). Dolosos crimes involve the perpetrator's awareness and intention to cause harm, such as murder.

• Culposo crimes arise from negligence or imprudence without intent to cause harm; for example, causing death through reckless driving may qualify as homicide culposo.

Importance of Classification in Criminal Law

• The classification into dolosos and culposos is significant because it affects the structure of criminal liability and potential defenses available.

• Only intentional crimes can have attempts recognized legally; negligent crimes do not allow for this consideration under current legal frameworks.

Legal Framework for Culposo Crimes

• In many jurisdictions, only specific forms of culposo offenses are punishable if explicitly stated within the penal code, adhering to a closed system of criminal types.

• Not all offenses have both intentional and negligent forms; for instance, robbery exists solely as an intentional crime with no provision for negligent robbery.

Special vs. Common Offenses

• Offenses are further divided into special types requiring specific characteristics from the offender versus common types where anyone can be liable.

• For example, homicide can be committed by any person (common), while certain corruption offenses require public officials (special).

Distinctions Within Special Offenses

• Special offenses may include categories like "improper" where basic acts can be committed by anyone but become aggravated based on the offender's status (e.g., public official).

• Some authors propose classifications based on direct physical involvement required from the offender in certain crimes like sexual assault—termed "delitos de propia mano."

This structured overview captures key concepts discussed in the transcript regarding human conduct within criminal law, emphasizing distinctions between various types of crimes and their implications.

Classification of Criminal Offenses

Types of Criminal Offenses

• The classification of criminal offenses includes types of injury and types of danger. Injury offenses require the destruction of the protected object, such as homicide, which necessitates that the victim is deceased for the crime to be complete.

• In contrast, danger offenses do not require actual harm but only the endangerment of a protected object. For example, Article 104 in Argentine law defines an offense where merely firing a weapon at someone constitutes a crime due to the inherent danger it poses.

• The rationale behind classifying certain actions as crimes lies in their potential to create risk. Discharging a firearm creates a threat to life and physical integrity without needing an actual injury or death.

Concrete vs. Abstract Danger

• Danger offenses are further divided into concrete and abstract categories. Concrete danger requires specific circumstances where an action puts a legal good (like life or health) at risk.

• Abstract danger does not necessitate any specific outcome; it suffices that there is potential risk. An example is Article 189 bis, which penalizes simply carrying a firearm in public without any act of violence.

• Similarly, possession of narcotics for personal use can be classified as an abstract danger offense since it poses potential risks to public health without requiring intent to distribute.

Activity vs. Result Crimes

• Criminal offenses can also be categorized into pure activity crimes and result crimes. Pure activity crimes focus solely on human conduct or omission without requiring specific outcomes.

• For instance, Article 108 addresses failure to assist someone in peril as a pure activity crime; no resultant harm needs to occur for liability to arise.

• Conversely, result crimes necessitate establishing a direct link between an action/omission and a specified outcome (e.g., homicide requires proof of death).

Importance of Causality

• Understanding these classifications is crucial for discussing causality and objective attribution between actions and results within criminal law contexts.

• This distinction aids in analyzing how different types of criminal behavior are treated under legal frameworks based on whether they involve mere actions or consequential results.