庭审阶段犯罪事实认定程序问题研究
发布时间：2018-08-12 13:55
【摘要】：刑事诉讼的主要作用是对犯罪事实进行查明并适用法律进行裁判。在庭审阶段,犯罪事实的查明程序要发挥出应有的功效,就应当有相应的程序保障。然在现今的刑事诉讼庭审阶段犯罪事实认定程序中存在许多的问题,如侦查结果成为法庭犯罪事实认定的基础、庭后阅卷、事实认定无法定程序、自由心证的证据制度尚未确立、将犯罪事实认定与证据的采信混为一谈等等。因此在分析、研究目前庭审阶段犯罪事实认定程序中存在的问题的基础上,提出推进以审判为中心的司法体制改革、建立以庭审为中心的犯罪事实认定机制、建立自由心证的证据制度和构建法官对犯罪事实认定的操作程序,对我国的刑事诉讼立法、司法和刑事诉讼法学科的发展和刑事司法改革的推进具有重要的意义和价值。 除引言和结语部分,本文共分为四章： 第一章,本章主要运用语义分析的方法首先对犯罪事实、犯罪事实认定、犯罪事实认定程序等概念作出界定,以区分犯罪证据、证据的采信等概念,为后续的论述定基调；通过多角度的词义解析,加深对犯罪事实认定程序本身更为深刻、全面的认识。 第二章,通过对两大法系主要国家庭审阶段犯罪事实认定程序的介绍和分析,比较两大法系主要国家在庭审阶段犯罪事实认定程序设置上的异同点,明确两大法系尤其是大陆法系国家对犯罪事实认定程序的特点,以便为构建我国庭审阶段犯罪事实认定程序提供可资借鉴的素材。 第三章,通过对我国目前庭审阶段犯罪事实认定的主要特点的分析,指出我国现阶段庭审程序设置和庭审推进上存在的不足和缺陷,使下文构建我国庭审阶段犯罪事实认定程序的阐述更加具有针对性。 第四章,根据对犯罪事实认定程序概念的界定,借鉴两大法系尤其是大陆法系国家对犯罪事实认定程序的设置经验,针对我国现阶段庭审程序设置和庭审推进上存在的不足和缺陷,运用逻辑方法,提出推进以庭审为中心的审判制度改革、建立自由心证的证据制度、构建法官庭审阶段犯罪事实的认定程序,为刑诉法要求的“案件事实清楚”的法律规定提供可操作的标准。
[Abstract]:The main function of criminal procedure is to find out the facts of crime and apply the law to judge. In the trial stage, the procedure of finding out the facts of crime should have the corresponding procedural guarantee in order to exert its due effect. However, there are many problems in the criminal fact determination procedure in the trial stage of the present criminal procedure. For example, the investigation result becomes the basis of the court crime fact determination, the post-court examination paper, the fact determination does not have the legal procedure, The evidence system of free evidence has not yet been established, and the identification of criminal facts is confused with the acceptance of evidence and so on. Therefore, on the basis of analyzing and studying the problems existing in the procedure of determining the fact of crime in the trial stage, this paper puts forward to promote the judicial system reform with the trial as the center, and establish the mechanism of the cognizance of the fact of the crime taking the trial as the center. It is of great significance and value to establish the evidence system of free evidence and the operating procedure of judge's cognizance of the fact of crime. It is of great significance and value to the legislation of criminal procedure, the development of the discipline of judicature and criminal procedure law and the advancement of the reform of criminal justice in our country. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into four chapters: the first chapter mainly uses the method of semantic analysis to define the concepts of crime fact, criminal fact cognizance procedure and so on. In order to distinguish the concepts of criminal evidence and acceptance of evidence, this paper sets the tone for the subsequent discussion, and deepens the deeper and more comprehensive understanding of the procedure of determining the facts of crime through the analysis of word meanings from many angles. The second chapter, through the introduction and analysis of the criminal fact determination procedure in the trial stage of the main countries of the two legal systems, compares the similarities and differences between the two major legal system countries in the establishment of the procedure for the determination of the criminal facts in the trial stage. This paper clarifies the characteristics of the criminal fact determination procedure in the two major legal systems, especially in the continental law system, in order to provide reference material for the construction of the criminal fact determination procedure in the trial stage of our country. The third chapter, through the analysis of the main characteristics of the fact of the crime during the trial stage in our country, points out the shortcomings and defects in the setting up of the trial procedure and the advance of the court trial in our country at the present stage. So that the following construction of our country trial stage of criminal fact identification procedures more targeted. The fourth chapter, according to the definition of the concept of the criminal fact determination procedure, draw lessons from the experience of the establishment of the criminal fact determination procedure in the countries of the two major legal systems, especially the continental law system. In view of the deficiencies and defects in the setting up of court procedure and the advance of trial in our country at the present stage, this paper, by using the logical method, puts forward the reform of the trial system centered on the trial and the establishment of the evidence system of free evidence. In order to provide an operational standard for the legal stipulation of "clear facts of case" required by the Criminal procedure Law, we should construct the procedure of determining the fact of crime in the trial stage of the judge.
【学位授予单位】：湖南师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2
本文编号：2179262
[Abstract]:The main function of criminal procedure is to find out the facts of crime and apply the law to judge. In the trial stage, the procedure of finding out the facts of crime should have the corresponding procedural guarantee in order to exert its due effect. However, there are many problems in the criminal fact determination procedure in the trial stage of the present criminal procedure. For example, the investigation result becomes the basis of the court crime fact determination, the post-court examination paper, the fact determination does not have the legal procedure, The evidence system of free evidence has not yet been established, and the identification of criminal facts is confused with the acceptance of evidence and so on. Therefore, on the basis of analyzing and studying the problems existing in the procedure of determining the fact of crime in the trial stage, this paper puts forward to promote the judicial system reform with the trial as the center, and establish the mechanism of the cognizance of the fact of the crime taking the trial as the center. It is of great significance and value to establish the evidence system of free evidence and the operating procedure of judge's cognizance of the fact of crime. It is of great significance and value to the legislation of criminal procedure, the development of the discipline of judicature and criminal procedure law and the advancement of the reform of criminal justice in our country. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this paper is divided into four chapters: the first chapter mainly uses the method of semantic analysis to define the concepts of crime fact, criminal fact cognizance procedure and so on. In order to distinguish the concepts of criminal evidence and acceptance of evidence, this paper sets the tone for the subsequent discussion, and deepens the deeper and more comprehensive understanding of the procedure of determining the facts of crime through the analysis of word meanings from many angles. The second chapter, through the introduction and analysis of the criminal fact determination procedure in the trial stage of the main countries of the two legal systems, compares the similarities and differences between the two major legal system countries in the establishment of the procedure for the determination of the criminal facts in the trial stage. This paper clarifies the characteristics of the criminal fact determination procedure in the two major legal systems, especially in the continental law system, in order to provide reference material for the construction of the criminal fact determination procedure in the trial stage of our country. The third chapter, through the analysis of the main characteristics of the fact of the crime during the trial stage in our country, points out the shortcomings and defects in the setting up of the trial procedure and the advance of the court trial in our country at the present stage. So that the following construction of our country trial stage of criminal fact identification procedures more targeted. The fourth chapter, according to the definition of the concept of the criminal fact determination procedure, draw lessons from the experience of the establishment of the criminal fact determination procedure in the countries of the two major legal systems, especially the continental law system. In view of the deficiencies and defects in the setting up of court procedure and the advance of trial in our country at the present stage, this paper, by using the logical method, puts forward the reform of the trial system centered on the trial and the establishment of the evidence system of free evidence. In order to provide an operational standard for the legal stipulation of "clear facts of case" required by the Criminal procedure Law, we should construct the procedure of determining the fact of crime in the trial stage of the judge.
【学位授予单位】：湖南师范大学
【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7条
1 张明楷;;案件事实的认定方法[J];法学杂志;2006年02期
2 郭华;;庭审案件事实认定程序规则研究[J];法学杂志;2008年01期
3 肖莉;;论刑事案件事实认定程序的理论探析[J];法制与社会;2010年09期
4 李鸿海;刑事侦查中的事实认定和法律认定[J];江苏公安专科学校学报;1999年03期
5 龙宗智;;论建立以一审庭审为中心的事实认定机制[J];中国法学;2010年02期
6 陈永生;法律事实与客观事实的契合与背离——对证据制度史另一视觉的解读[J];国家检察官学院学报;2003年04期
7 托马斯·魏特根;吴宏耀;;刑事诉讼致力于事实真相么——一个德国人的视角[J];证据学论坛;2005年02期
，本文编号：2179262
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2179262.html
