辩护律师向犯罪嫌疑人、被告人核实证据问题研究

发布时间：2018-06-03 16:53

本文选题：核实证据 + 证据知悉权　；参考：《四川省社会科学院》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：我国《刑事诉讼法》在2012年修正后,首次规定了核实证据制度。核实证据这一规则的确立便于于辩护律师在侦查阶段结束以后,审查起诉阶段、审判阶段中,在会见犯罪嫌疑人、被告人之时,向其核实案件的证据材料,从而确定证据材料的可靠性,更好地为辩护和质证做准备。然而,立法中对于“核实有关证据”的范围、方式均未作说明,目前也没有相关的立法解释、司法解释。理论界对此问题的观点基于立场的不同,司法界与律师界观点分歧较大。本文试图从理论与实践两方面着手,一方面对辩护律师以及犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的相关诉讼权利从理论层面进行分析,并参考域外的证据开示等有关制度,通过从犯罪嫌疑人、被告人视角与辩护律师视角进行分析,来探讨核实证据制度的理论依据;另一方面,从目前辩护律师核实证据的实践情况着手,针对核实证据可能造成的消极后果进行分析、解决。在此基础上,为核实证据这一规定,提出一些立法建议。本文正文分为四个部分。第一部分研究了目前核实证据制度的相关理论问题。主要从理论争议、被告人的辩护权利几方面进行分析,对辩护律师核实证据的目的,理论界的不同观点,核实证据制度对于犯罪嫌疑人、被告人质证权、证据知悉权等辩护权利的实现,庭审的顺利进行以及诉讼成本节约的必要性进行了重点探析。第二部分对核实证据制度的现状进行探讨,厘清核实证据相关制度在域内的实践现状以及域外的运用,在实践中应如何把握核实证据制度。第三部分主要讨论了核实证据制度的风险,包括辩护律师的执业风险以及控方的办案风险。第四部分对核实证据制度的进一步细化与完善提出了一些建议,对辩护律师核实证据的范围限制、核实的重点以及核实证据的方式、时间段的把握进行了探讨。根据前面几个部分的探讨,重点对核实证据制度如何细化规定,保护证人、被害人信息以及同案被告人供述的保密措施提出了一些建议与设想。
[Abstract]:After the amendment of the Criminal procedure Law in 2012, the system of verifying evidence is stipulated for the first time. The establishment of the rule on the verification of evidence is convenient for defence counsel to verify the evidentiary materials of the case at the end of the investigation stage, at the prosecution stage, during the trial stage, when meeting the criminal suspect or the accused, In order to determine the reliability of evidence materials, better defense and cross-examination preparation. However, the scope of "verification of relevant evidence" has not been explained in the legislation, and there is no relevant legislative interpretation or judicial interpretation at present. The views of the theorists on this issue are different from those of the judiciary and the lawyers. On the one hand, the author analyzes the related litigation rights of defense lawyers, suspects and defendants from a theoretical level, and refers to the relevant systems of evidence discovery outside the country, through the analysis of criminal suspects. On the other hand, starting from the current practice of verification of evidence by defense counsel, the author analyzes the possible negative consequences caused by verification of evidence. Resolve. On this basis, in order to verify the evidence of this provision, put forward some legislative proposals. The text of this paper is divided into four parts. The first part studies the current verification of evidence system related theoretical issues. Mainly from the theoretical dispute, the defendant's defense right several aspects to carry on the analysis, to the defense lawyer verifies the evidence the purpose, the theory circle's different viewpoint, verifies the evidence system to the criminal suspect, the defendant cross-examination right, The realization of defense right such as the right to know evidence, the smooth progress of trial and the necessity of cost saving are analyzed. The second part discusses the current situation of the verification evidence system, clarifies the practice status and the extraterritorial application of the verification evidence system in the region, and how to grasp the verification evidence system in practice. The third part mainly discusses the risk of verifying evidence system, including the practice risk of defense counsel and the risk of prosecution. In the fourth part, some suggestions are put forward to further refine and perfect the system of verifying evidence, and the limits of the scope of the verification of evidence by defense counsel, the emphasis of verification, the way of verifying evidence, and the assurance of time period are discussed. According to the discussion of the previous several parts, this paper puts forward some suggestions and ideas on how to refine the rules of verification evidence system, how to protect the witness, the information of the victim and the confidential measures of the defendant's statement in the same case.
【学位授予单位】：四川省社会科学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】