我国无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量的完善

发布时间：2018-12-19 10:25

【摘要】：对无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量的程序改革提供实体上的支持,就必须对最高人民法院所制定的《量刑指导意见》及各地高级人民法院所制定的《实施细则》中关于无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量存在的问题进行研究,从而找出法官在进行无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量时不适用“量刑指导意见”的原因。目前在司法实践中,导致法官进行无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量时,不适用“量刑指导意见”的主要原因有三个：一是“量刑指导意见”并不能避免无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量失衡；二是“量刑指导意见”对无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量中“因素”范围划定狭小；三是“量刑指导意见”不能指引法官在无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量中正确行使自由裁量权。因此,要规范无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量,就必须从以下两个方面着手解决：一是要确立科学的无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量的规范。这就要求规范无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量不仅要符合《刑法》的要求,同时还要辩证看待“量刑指导意见”所使用的量刑方法与其他量刑方法对无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量所起到的作用。二是要在制度上督促法官正确对无量刑情节犯罪进行刑罚裁量。这就要求法官对无量刑情节犯罪的刑罚裁量作出合理化说明；要求法官对无量刑情节犯罪作出刑罚裁量之前遵循先例判决；要求检察官对法官已作出的无量刑情节犯罪刑罚裁量进行评价。
[Abstract]:To provide substantive support for the reform of the criminal penalty discretion procedure without sentencing circumstances, It is necessary to study the problems existing in the "sentencing guidance opinion" formulated by the Supreme people's Court and the "detailed rules for implementation" formulated by the higher people's courts in various localities concerning the discretion of criminal penalties without sentencing circumstances, Therefore, the reason why the judge does not apply the sentencing guidance in the penalty discretion of the crime without sentencing circumstances is found out. At present, in judicial practice, there are three main reasons why judges do not apply "sentencing guidance opinion" when they decide the penalty of crime without sentencing circumstances: first, "sentencing guidance opinion" can not avoid the unbalance of criminal penalty discretion without sentencing circumstances; Second, the sentencing guidance opinion delimits a narrow range of "factors" in the penalty discretion of the crime without sentencing circumstances; third, the sentencing guidance opinion cannot guide the judge to correctly exercise the discretion in the penalty discretion of the crime without sentencing circumstances. Therefore, in order to standardize the penalty discretion of crime without sentencing circumstances, we must solve it from the following two aspects: first, we should establish a scientific standard of criminal penalty discretion without circumstances of sentencing. This requires that the discretion to regulate the penalty for crimes without circumstances of sentencing should not only meet the requirements of the Criminal Law, At the same time, we should dialectically view the effect of sentencing methods and other sentencing methods on the penalty discretion of crimes without sentencing circumstances. The other is to urge the judge to judge the penalty correctly. This requires the judge to make a reasonable explanation of the penalty discretion of the crime without sentencing circumstances, and to follow the precedent judgment before the judge makes the penalty judgment on the crime without sentencing circumstances; The prosecutor is required to evaluate the judge's discretion in the penalty of a crime without sentencing circumstances.
【学位授予单位】：中南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.13

【参考文献】