خلاصة:
To discriminate compound crimes from simple ones as the result of dividing the crimes according to the material element from different aspects (like the circumstance of committing a crime، findings of the legal enforcement، a statute setting a time limit on legal action، determining the criminal liability and the proper trial) is important. However the nature of this offense has not been stated clearly in the Iranian criminal law and has only mentioned brief explanations and indicated one sample (fraud). To interpret the complicated nature of the compound crimes، we could have two different notions. First، the meaning of compounding a crime is that the material element consists of the several parts. But this understanding confronts a clear problem because in this situation، at least all the result offenses which their material elements are composed of conduct and results should name the compound
ملخص الجهاز:
Therefore, the main goal in this article is the presentation of a relatively accurate concept and criterion for compound crime, while examining and enumerating the flaws in the definitions and criteria provided by legal scholars, so that it can be better distinguished from simple crimes and other similar concepts.
Regarding the statute of limitations for compound crimes, all criminal law scholars agree that the statute of limitations begins from the performance of the last act, because it is from this date that the crime has been fully committed (Moatamed, 1351: 34; Sanei, 1382: 449), such that if someone, with the intent to commit fraud, resorted to fraudulent methods five years ago, these kinds of preparatory acts have no effect on the attainment of the statute of limitations, and the statute of limitations begins from the date of the realization of the result, meaning the taking of someone else's property, begins (Mohseni, 1382: 361).
Therefore, if the aforementioned individuals perform part of the compound crime despite the presence of the mental element, there is no reason to claim that participation in the crime has not occurred; because in this case, the committed crime is attributed to both persons and is the result of the actions of both, and this matter alone is sufficient to create their criminal liability (Bell & Boyron & Whittaker, 1998: 216).
In Common Law, too, definitions nearly similar to the crime of fraud have been presented as an instance of compound crime; for example, a person who, by resorting to deceptive means, appropriates another's property with the intent of permanent deprivation, is considered a fraudster (Elliott & Quinn, 2006: 229).
(
, 
, 
)
