证明标准及其在死刑案件中的适用
发布时间：2019-06-04 21:01
【摘要】：在刑事诉讼中,证明标准是一个重要的法律概念,也是近年来在学术领域引起广泛讨论的一个话题。证明标准的重要性体现在其对刑事案件的立案、侦查、审查起诉、提起公诉、法庭审理等各个环节的指引作用,公、检、法三机关的办案人员正是在证明标准的指引下开展相关的工作,确保刑事案件在各个环节能够得到正确的处理。其中,在对被告人作出有罪判决的刑事案件中,法官要根据证明标准来判断公诉机关对被告人的有罪指控是否达到了法律规定的要求,这对于保证判决的准确性而言具有重要作用。在重大刑事案件中,被告人的犯罪行为给社会和他人造成了极其恶劣的影响,根据罪责刑相适应的原则,被告人有可能被判处死刑,而一旦错判,就会造成无法挽回的后果。在我国的司法实践中,刑事案件的审判质量一直备受质疑,特别是近些年来出现的佘祥林案、杜培武案、浙江叔侄案等一批冤假错案,不仅给无辜的“被告人”造成了极大的损失,更使司法的权威受到了极大的威胁。出现这种现象,与我国证明标准的存在的不足和缺陷有直接的关系。基于此,学者和司法实务人士对死刑案件的证明标准给予了高度的关注,以期通过确立一个切实、可行的证明标准来减少死刑误判、错判的可能性,使死刑案件审判质量可以得到提高。 在诸多学者对该问题进行的广泛和深入的研究基础之上,本文结合两个证据规定和新《刑事诉讼法》对证明标准的完善,并通过对2013年再审的浙江叔侄案的剖析,对证明标准问题进行了研究,并提出通过完善相关程序来保证死刑案件判决质量的观点。 第一章是证明标准的概述,对证明标准的概念、意义进行了简要阐述,并介绍了证明标准的历史,其中重点对“排除合理怀疑”的证明标准和“内心确信”的证明标准进行了研究。 第二章是我国证明标准的确立,研究了我国“事实清楚,证据确实、充分”的证明标准从无到有的确立过程,并对这一独具特色的证明标准进行了评析。 第三章是我国证明标准在司法实践中引发的问题,主要是通过对浙江张高平、张辉叔侄一案进行分析,总结了近些年出现的冤假错案中反映出的证明标准存在的问题。 第四章是证明标准新规定的理解与适用,主要是《死刑案件证据规定》和新《刑事诉讼法》对证明标准的新规定,并对新规定的理解和适用进行了分析。 第五章是对死刑案件证明标准贯彻、落实措施的思考,主张区分定罪程序与量刑程序,并适用不同的证明标准；实行多元化的证明标准,根据证明对象、证明责任承担主体的不同而适用不同的证明标准；通过提高死刑案件合议庭的人数、死刑判决须经合议庭一致同意以及完善死刑复核程序来提高作出死刑判决的条件,以此保证死刑判决的准确性。
[Abstract]:In criminal proceedings, proof standard is an important legal concept, and it is also a topic widely discussed in academic field in recent years. The importance of the standard of proof is reflected in its guiding role in filing criminal cases, investigating, examining and prosecuting, and so on, public and procuratorial. It is under the guidance of proof standards that the case operators of the three legal organs carry out the relevant work to ensure that criminal cases can be dealt with correctly in all aspects. Among them, in criminal cases in which the defendant is convicted, the judge shall judge whether the charge of guilt against the defendant by the public prosecution organ has met the requirements prescribed by law according to the standard of proof. This plays an important role in ensuring the accuracy of the judgment. In major criminal cases, the criminal behavior of the defendant has a very bad impact on society and others. According to the principle of adaptation of responsibility and punishment, the defendant may be sentenced to death, and once misjudged, it will cause irreparable consequences. In the judicial practice of our country, the trial quality of criminal cases has been questioned all the time, especially in recent years, such as she Xianglin case, du Peiwu case, Zhejiang nephew case and so on. It not only caused great losses to innocent defendants, but also threatened the judicial authority. This phenomenon is directly related to the shortcomings and defects of the standard of proof in our country. Based on this, scholars and judicial practitioners have paid great attention to the proof standard of death penalty cases, in order to reduce the possibility of miscarriage of death penalty and misjudgment by establishing a practical and feasible proof standard. The quality of death penalty cases can be improved. On the basis of extensive and in-depth research on this issue by many scholars, this paper combines the two provisions of evidence and the improvement of the standard of proof in the new Criminal procedure Law, and through the analysis of the case of Zhejiang nephew, which was retried in 2013. This paper studies the standard of proof, and puts forward the viewpoint that the quality of death penalty cases can be guaranteed by perfecting the relevant procedures. The first chapter is an overview of the standard of proof, which briefly expounds the concept and significance of the standard of proof, and introduces the history of the standard of proof. Among them, the proof standard of eliminating reasonable doubt and the proof standard of inner conviction are studied. The second chapter is the establishment of the standard of proof in our country, which studies the process of establishing the standard of proof that "the facts are clear, the evidence is true and sufficient", and comments on this unique standard of proof. The third chapter is the problems caused by the standard of proof in the judicial practice of our country, mainly through the analysis of the case of Zhang Gaoping and Zhang Hui's nephew in Zhejiang Province, and summarizes the problems of the standard of proof reflected in the unjust and false cases in recent years. The fourth chapter is the understanding and application of the new provisions of the standard of proof, mainly the new provisions of the evidence provisions of death penalty cases and the new Code of Criminal procedure, and analyzes the understanding and application of the new provisions. The fifth chapter is the implementation of the standard of proof in death penalty cases, the implementation of measures, advocating the distinction between conviction procedures and sentencing procedures, and the application of different standards of proof; The implementation of diversified standards of proof, according to the object of proof, the burden of proof of the subject of different and applicable to different standards of proof; By increasing the number of collegial panels in death penalty cases, the death penalty sentence must be agreed by the collegial panel and the death penalty review procedure should be improved to improve the conditions for the execution of the death penalty, so as to ensure the accuracy of the death penalty sentence.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2
本文编号：2492998
[Abstract]:In criminal proceedings, proof standard is an important legal concept, and it is also a topic widely discussed in academic field in recent years. The importance of the standard of proof is reflected in its guiding role in filing criminal cases, investigating, examining and prosecuting, and so on, public and procuratorial. It is under the guidance of proof standards that the case operators of the three legal organs carry out the relevant work to ensure that criminal cases can be dealt with correctly in all aspects. Among them, in criminal cases in which the defendant is convicted, the judge shall judge whether the charge of guilt against the defendant by the public prosecution organ has met the requirements prescribed by law according to the standard of proof. This plays an important role in ensuring the accuracy of the judgment. In major criminal cases, the criminal behavior of the defendant has a very bad impact on society and others. According to the principle of adaptation of responsibility and punishment, the defendant may be sentenced to death, and once misjudged, it will cause irreparable consequences. In the judicial practice of our country, the trial quality of criminal cases has been questioned all the time, especially in recent years, such as she Xianglin case, du Peiwu case, Zhejiang nephew case and so on. It not only caused great losses to innocent defendants, but also threatened the judicial authority. This phenomenon is directly related to the shortcomings and defects of the standard of proof in our country. Based on this, scholars and judicial practitioners have paid great attention to the proof standard of death penalty cases, in order to reduce the possibility of miscarriage of death penalty and misjudgment by establishing a practical and feasible proof standard. The quality of death penalty cases can be improved. On the basis of extensive and in-depth research on this issue by many scholars, this paper combines the two provisions of evidence and the improvement of the standard of proof in the new Criminal procedure Law, and through the analysis of the case of Zhejiang nephew, which was retried in 2013. This paper studies the standard of proof, and puts forward the viewpoint that the quality of death penalty cases can be guaranteed by perfecting the relevant procedures. The first chapter is an overview of the standard of proof, which briefly expounds the concept and significance of the standard of proof, and introduces the history of the standard of proof. Among them, the proof standard of eliminating reasonable doubt and the proof standard of inner conviction are studied. The second chapter is the establishment of the standard of proof in our country, which studies the process of establishing the standard of proof that "the facts are clear, the evidence is true and sufficient", and comments on this unique standard of proof. The third chapter is the problems caused by the standard of proof in the judicial practice of our country, mainly through the analysis of the case of Zhang Gaoping and Zhang Hui's nephew in Zhejiang Province, and summarizes the problems of the standard of proof reflected in the unjust and false cases in recent years. The fourth chapter is the understanding and application of the new provisions of the standard of proof, mainly the new provisions of the evidence provisions of death penalty cases and the new Code of Criminal procedure, and analyzes the understanding and application of the new provisions. The fifth chapter is the implementation of the standard of proof in death penalty cases, the implementation of measures, advocating the distinction between conviction procedures and sentencing procedures, and the application of different standards of proof; The implementation of diversified standards of proof, according to the object of proof, the burden of proof of the subject of different and applicable to different standards of proof; By increasing the number of collegial panels in death penalty cases, the death penalty sentence must be agreed by the collegial panel and the death penalty review procedure should be improved to improve the conditions for the execution of the death penalty, so as to ensure the accuracy of the death penalty sentence.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【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 陈卫东,刘计划;关于完善我国刑事证明标准体系的若干思考[J];法律科学.西北政法学院学报;2001年03期
2 陈殿福;;从错案的产生谈刑事案件证明标准的几个问题[J];法律适用;2006年07期
3 杨宇冠;孙军;;“排除合理怀疑”与我国刑事诉讼证明标准的完善[J];证据科学;2011年06期
4 张德英;刘汝宽;张亚卓;;从浙江叔侄冤案反思侦查中的问题——兼谈侦查人员的法律素质[J];贵州警官职业学院学报;2013年06期
5 陈瑞华;;量刑程序中的证据规则[J];吉林大学社会科学学报;2011年01期
6 陈卫东;李训虎;;分而治之:一种完善死刑案件证明标准的思路[J];人民检察;2007年08期
7 张中;论刑事诉讼的证明标准[J];山东法学;1999年06期
8 杨宇冠;;论死刑案件证明标准之完善——新《刑事诉讼法》实施问题思考[J];清华法学;2012年03期
9 陈虎;;提高死刑案件证明标准 一个似是而非的命题[J];中外法学;2010年03期
10 樊崇义;客观真实管见——兼论刑事诉讼证明标准[J];中国法学;2000年01期
，本文编号：2492998
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/2492998.html
