精神障碍者刑事责任能力的判断标准之新尝试

发布时间：2018-05-22 12:11

本文选题：精神障碍者 + 刑事责任能力　；参考：《四川师范大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：责任能力的有无及程度直接关系着刑事案件的定性和处理,是刑法的论争焦点之一。在我国,关于精神障碍者刑事责任能力的立法方式是医学——法学的混合模式,但当前对于精神障碍者刑事责任能力的判断仍未形成统一的标准。本文立足于刑法学及精神医学等,从精神障碍者刑事责任能力的概说出发,认为精神障碍是医学概念和法学概念的交错,对刑事责任能力判断的关键在于控制能力和辨认能力;其次论述精神障碍者刑事责任能力的本质和地位,认可刑事责任能力的本质是犯罪能力的观点,赞同将刑事责任能力的地位阐述为责任要素说的观点;而后介绍英美法系和大陆法系国家关于精神障碍者刑事责任能力的判断标准,论述医学-法学的混合判断标准的可取之处;最后对精神障碍者刑事责任能力的判断标准作出新尝试,将其具体化,强调要把握主体、时间、等级和内容四个标准。在主体标准上,坚持法官的主导地位。在精神医学鉴定人对是否存在精神障碍以及所患精神障碍的种类进行判断后的基础上由法官独立作出评估。在必要时,法官还可邀请心理专家与其共同对行为人的心理状态作出判断,最后法官结合前述两位专家的意见综合其他证据,适当考量社会的法感情于法规范上对精神障碍者的刑事责任能力做最终确认;在时间标准上,采用“追溯法”的判断标准。将“行为时”追溯划分为“过去时”、“涉案时”、“鉴定时”三个时间段以便于判断,并且综合考虑案件相关证据材料追溯至涉案时的精神状态对其责任能力的影响程度;在等级标准上,坚持三分制下的判断标准,法官在判断行为人为完全刑事责任能力、无刑事责任能力还是限制责任能力时,可对这三种状态进行假设,而后再根据具体案情和行为人的状况排除两种情形,得出最终结论;在内容标准上,应当把握辨认能力和控制能力的具体内容,进而作出判断。接着以一个经典旧案回归实践,将四个具体的判断标准运用于该案中以巩固自己的立场,之后进一步阐明其延伸意义。
[Abstract]:Whether or not the capacity of responsibility is directly related to the nature and handling of criminal cases is one of the focuses of debate in criminal law. In our country, the legislative mode of criminal responsibility ability of mental disorders is the mixed mode of medical-jurisprudence, but the judgment of criminal responsibility ability of mental disorders has not yet formed a unified standard. Based on the criminal law and psychiatric science, the author thinks that mental disorder is the interlacing of medical concept and legal concept, and the key to judge criminal responsibility ability lies in control ability and recognition ability. Secondly, it discusses the essence and status of the criminal responsibility ability of the mental disorder, recognizes that the essence of the criminal responsibility ability is the criminal ability, and agrees with the view that the position of the criminal responsibility ability is described as the responsibility element theory; Then it introduces the judgment standard of the criminal responsibility ability of the mental disorders in Anglo-American law system and the continental law system, and discusses the merits of the mixed judgment standard of medical-jurisprudence. Finally, a new attempt is made to judge the criminal responsibility ability of the mentally handicapped, which is concretized, emphasizing the four standards of subject, time, grade and content. In the subject standard, adhere to the leading position of the judge. On the basis of the judgment made by the psychiatrist on the existence of mental disorders and the types of mental disorders suffered from mental disorders, the judge makes an independent assessment. If necessary, the judge may also invite a psychologist to work with him to judge the psychological state of the perpetrator, and finally, combining the opinions of the two experts, the judge may synthesize other evidence, Due consideration should be given to the legal feelings of the society and the final confirmation of the criminal responsibility ability of the mentally handicapped in the legal norm; in the time standard, the judgment standard of "retrospective law" should be adopted. Classifying "behavior time" into "past tense", "time involved in case" and "appraisal time" in order to facilitate judgment, and considering comprehensively the influence of the mental state of the case related to the time of the case to its ability of responsibility; On the level standard, the judge can hypothesize the three states when judging that the actor is full criminal responsibility ability, no criminal responsibility ability or limited liability ability. Then the final conclusion is drawn according to the circumstances of the case and the situation of the perpetrator. In the content standard, the concrete content of the identification ability and the control ability should be grasped, and then the judgment should be made. Then, four specific criteria are applied to the case in order to consolidate their own stand, and then to further clarify its extended significance.
【学位授予单位】：四川师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924

【参考文献】