独立量刑程序的证明问题研究

发布时间：2018-02-12 08:28

本文关键词： 独立量刑程序量刑证明证明对象证明责任证明规则　出处：《兰州大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：自从2010年全国法院开始全面试行由三高两部联合签发的《关于规范量刑程序若干问题的意见(试行)》,我国就确立了在刑事诉讼程序中适用相对独立量刑程序的制度。而鉴于相对独立量刑程序的本质和其自身带有的特点,要全面贯彻实行相对独立量刑程序就产生了一个无法回避的问题——量刑证明问题。量刑证明可以说是整个独立量刑程序的精髓,无论是我国的相对独立量刑程序还是英美法系中狭义的独立量刑程序,其都离不开量刑证明。如果没有量刑证明的支撑,独立量刑很可能成为一个“为了程序而程序”的空架子,既无法从实质上起到规范量刑活动的目的,也无法从根本上对量刑时法官的自由裁量权进行限制。尽管我国已经在量刑独立化方面迈出了历史性的一步,但目前处于全面试行阶段的相对独立的量刑程序仍然在量刑证明方面存在很多需要填充的内容。鉴于此,对于国外量刑证明制度方面的借鉴就很有必要了,这也是我国法律学人传统的研究手段之一。对于我国相对独立量刑程序的完善最具借鉴意义的还是英美法系独立量刑程序下的量刑证明制度,同时大陆法系国家近些年也推出了一些有关量刑制度改革的举措,其对我国量刑制度的完善也具有重要的指导意义。在不改变我国当前基本司法制度的前提下,在坚持采用大陆法系职权主义审判模式的基础之上,大力引进和吸收英美法系当事人主义审判模式中对于量刑证明的合理规定已经成为了目前刑事诉诉法学界众多学者的共识。全文共分为五章,笔者拟从广义的独立量刑程序和整个刑事诉讼中证明的概念和特征谈起,从多个角度分析独立量刑量程序中证明的重要性和特殊性,然后再通过比较两大法系在量刑证明具体问题上的异同,找出我国现行相对独立量刑程序中在量刑证明的证明对象、证明责任以及证明标准三个方面存在的不足和缺陷,以期能够提出一些具有现实意义的改善意见。
[Abstract]:Since 2010, when the national courts began to try out the opinions on some issues concerning the standardization of sentencing procedures (for trial implementation) issued jointly by the three high and two ministries, China has established the system of applying relatively independent sentencing procedures in criminal proceedings. And given the nature of the relatively independent sentencing process and its own characteristics, In order to fully implement the relatively independent sentencing procedure, an unavoidable problem arises-the issue of sentencing proof. Sentencing proof can be said to be the essence of the whole independent sentencing procedure. No matter the relatively independent sentencing procedure in our country or the narrow independent sentencing procedure in Anglo-American law system, it can not be separated from sentencing proof. Independent sentencing is likely to be an empty frame of "procedure for the sake of procedure", which can not actually serve the purpose of standardizing sentencing activities, nor can it fundamentally restrict the discretion of judges in sentencing. Although our country has taken a historic step in the independence of sentencing, the relatively independent sentencing procedure, which is currently in the comprehensive trial stage, still has a lot to fill in the aspect of sentencing proof. In view of this, It is necessary for foreign countries to draw lessons from the sentencing certification system. This is also one of the traditional research methods of Chinese legal scholars. The most significant reference for the perfection of relatively independent sentencing procedure in China is the sentencing certification system under the independent sentencing procedure in Anglo-American law system. At the same time, some measures about the reform of sentencing system have been put forward in the countries of civil law system in recent years, which have important guiding significance for the perfection of sentencing system in our country. Without changing the current basic judicial system of our country, On the basis of adhering to the civil law system, it has become the consensus of many scholars in the field of criminal action to introduce and absorb the reasonable provisions of sentencing proof in the trial mode of litigant doctrine in Anglo-American law system. The full text is divided into five chapters. The author intends to discuss the concept and characteristics of the independent sentencing procedure and the whole criminal procedure, and analyze the importance and particularity of the proof in the independent sentencing procedure from many angles. Then by comparing the similarities and differences between the two legal systems on the specific issue of sentencing proof, we find out the shortcomings and defects in three aspects of the current relatively independent sentencing procedure in our country, namely, the object of proof, the burden of proof and the standard of proof. In order to be able to put forward some practical significance of improvement.
【学位授予单位】：兰州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】