论刑事二审发回重审须慎用
发布时间：2018-07-29 12:50
【摘要】：2012年刑事诉讼法第二次修正案对于二审法院的发回重审制度进行了较大幅度的修订和完善，其顺应刑事诉讼法学界的呼声和要求，明确规定了二审发回重审的次数以一次为限。但是，我们不能把刑事二审发回重审制度的改造过程看成是一个孤立的过程。在刑事二审发回重审制度的适用中，新刑事诉讼法的修改完善只是为发回重审制度的功能发挥确立了立法基础，要将立法精神与法律制度在司法实践中真正落到实处，笔者认为前提是要坚持慎用二审发回重审制度，其中的慎用是指在适用二审发回重审的过程中要对其严加规范和限制。因此，，本文从二审发回重审的含义特征、慎用的价值思考出发，通过借鉴域外典型国家及地区对我国刑事二审发回重审慎用的启示以及分析为什么要在刑事二审发回重审制度的适用过程中坚持慎用原则，就慎用发回重审提出一些具体应用的建议，以期引起读者对这一制度规范适用的重视和思考，以期更好地维护法的程序正义价值和司法公正价值。
[Abstract]:The second Amendment of Criminal procedure Law in 2012 revised and perfected the retrial system of the court of second instance to a large extent, which complied with the voice and request of the criminal procedure law circle, and clearly stipulated that the number of retrial of the second instance should be limited to one time. However, we can not regard the reform process of criminal retrial system as an isolated process. In the application of the retrial system of criminal second instance, the revision and perfection of the new criminal procedure law only establishes the legislative basis for the function of the retrial system, and it is necessary to put the legislative spirit and the legal system into practice in the judicial practice. The author thinks that the premise is to insist on the system of second instance remanding and retrial, in which the cautious use means that the second instance should be strictly regulated and restricted in the process of applying it. Therefore, this article starts from the meaning characteristics of the second instance and the value of careful use. By drawing lessons from typical countries and regions in foreign countries and regions to enlighten and analyze why we should adhere to the principle of caution in the application of the system of remanding the second instance of criminal justice in our country, and analyze the reasons why we should adhere to the principle of caution in the application of the system of remanding criminal second instance. This paper puts forward some concrete suggestions on the application of caution in retrial, in order to arouse readers' attention and reflection on the application of this system, so as to better safeguard the procedural justice value and judicial justice value of law.
【学位授予单位】：太原科技大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2
本文编号：2152728
[Abstract]:The second Amendment of Criminal procedure Law in 2012 revised and perfected the retrial system of the court of second instance to a large extent, which complied with the voice and request of the criminal procedure law circle, and clearly stipulated that the number of retrial of the second instance should be limited to one time. However, we can not regard the reform process of criminal retrial system as an isolated process. In the application of the retrial system of criminal second instance, the revision and perfection of the new criminal procedure law only establishes the legislative basis for the function of the retrial system, and it is necessary to put the legislative spirit and the legal system into practice in the judicial practice. The author thinks that the premise is to insist on the system of second instance remanding and retrial, in which the cautious use means that the second instance should be strictly regulated and restricted in the process of applying it. Therefore, this article starts from the meaning characteristics of the second instance and the value of careful use. By drawing lessons from typical countries and regions in foreign countries and regions to enlighten and analyze why we should adhere to the principle of caution in the application of the system of remanding the second instance of criminal justice in our country, and analyze the reasons why we should adhere to the principle of caution in the application of the system of remanding criminal second instance. This paper puts forward some concrete suggestions on the application of caution in retrial, in order to arouse readers' attention and reflection on the application of this system, so as to better safeguard the procedural justice value and judicial justice value of law.
【学位授予单位】：太原科技大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 陈光中;卞建林;陈卫东;宋英辉;李晶;;《刑事诉讼法》修改专家笔谈[J];中国司法;2012年05期
2 王建宏;;透视发回重审与改判率 以社会主义司法制度的公正价值为视角[J];法律适用;2009年02期
3 樊崇义;;《刑事诉讼法》再修改的理性思考(下)[J];法学杂志;2008年02期
4 陈瑞华;对两审终审制的反思——从刑事诉讼角度的分析[J];法学;1999年12期
5 张会峰;刑事诉讼法中的程序性裁判[J];法学;2002年04期
6 陈瑞华;未决羁押制度的理论反思[J];法学研究;2002年05期
7 陈卫东,李奋飞;刑事二审“发回重审”制度之重构[J];法学研究;2004年01期
8 谢萍;二审刑事案件改判、发回重审的原则和标准[J];人民司法;2002年05期
9 蔡晖;对认定事实存在问题的案件不应发回重审[J];人民司法;1998年02期
10 龙宗智;;新刑事诉讼法实施:半年初判[J];清华法学;2013年05期
本文编号：2152728
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2152728.html
