Glossary entry

Hungarian term or phrase:

elkövetői alakzat

English translation:

level of completion

Added to glossary by Jilt
Feb 2, 2012 13:38
12 yrs ago
6 viewers *
Hungarian term

elkövetői alakzat

Hungarian to English Law/Patents Law (general) Form
Dear forum,

What's the English translation of this term?

Context
(Form with details about a conviction)
Buncselekmeny: 188. § 1. BEK. 1 FORD. UTKOZO, 1 BEK. SZERINT MINOSULO: ITTAS ALLAPOTBAN ELKOVETETT KOZUTI JARMUVEZETES VETSEGE
elkovetesi hely: [HELY]
elkovetesi ido: [DATUM]
elkovetoi alakzat: tettes , elkovetesi alakzat: befejezett

I understand it's about the 'type' of perpetrator: was the crime his initiative (tettes) or was he an accomplice (reszes)? But how is this said in English?

Thanks!
Jilt

Discussion

Ildiko Laskay Feb 7, 2012:
The present glossary entry should be changed, because it's been mixed up and it's misleading.
The term in question, i.e. 'elkövetői alakzat' is not 'level of completion'.

Based on Krisztina's answer, it should be either
'ELKÖVETŐI alakzat=degree of involvement'
or
'ELKÖVETÉSI alakzat=level of completion'.

Proposed translations

+1
1 hr
Selected

level of completion

The 1st part should be the "Degree of involvement" (principal — accessory — aider — abetter). Here 'tettes' means principal.

The 2nd part is the "level of completion" It can be: completed act, attempt or preparation, here: 'befejezett' which means completed act.
Peer comment(s):

agree Ildiko Laskay : The term given should be 'degree of involvement'.
5 days
Something went wrong...
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer. Comment: "Thanks"
1 hr

bases of liability

"A bűncselekmény elkövetői - az előkészület kifejtőjén túl - a tettesek és a részesek. Mindkét elkövetői alakzat gyűjtőkategória. Tettesek a törvény értelmében az egyedüli (önálló) tettes és a társtettes. A büntetőjog-tudomány és a joggyakorlat ezen túl ismeri és alkalmazza a közvetett tettes kategóriáját is. Részesnek a felbujtót és a bűnsegédet tekintjük."

"Persons liable are the principal, accomplice and accessories."

The Smith court also held that where the two ways in which the crime may be committed are practically indistinguishable, the alternative bases of liability, either as principal or accessory, are not conceptually distinct.
106 S.Ct. 257, 88 L.Ed.2d 264 (1985), and in State v. Smith, supra, 605, found that in a case involving potential accessory liability, a jury verdict should be considered unanimous even if some jurors had found the defend.http://ct.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.1...

Chapter 4: Bases of liability
4.1 Principal and secondary offenders
http://insitelawmagazine.com/criminalch4.htm
Something went wrong...
Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search