【摘要】：針對(duì)法院量刑不規(guī)范,法官自由裁量權(quán)過(guò)大的問(wèn)題,從2009年5月開(kāi)始在個(gè)別基層法院試點(diǎn)量刑規(guī)范化改革,在2010年10月開(kāi)始在全國(guó)法院全面試行量刑規(guī)范化。根據(jù)最高人民法院、最高人民檢察院出臺(tái)的相關(guān)文件規(guī)定,刑事案件的法庭庭審程序中引入量刑建議,并在法庭調(diào)查中舉證量刑證據(jù)和在法庭辯論中辯論。作為創(chuàng)新的量刑規(guī)范化改革中的亮點(diǎn)之一——量刑建議,作為檢察機(jī)關(guān)求刑權(quán)的表現(xiàn)之一,受讀者關(guān)注。為了讓量刑建議起到監(jiān)督、制約法官自由裁量權(quán)的作用,讓量刑建議在良性軌道上發(fā)展,本文中分為前言、正文的三個(gè)部分進(jìn)行分別闡述。 前言是向讀者展示了現(xiàn)階段我國(guó)學(xué)者研究量刑建議的部分文章的內(nèi)容和對(duì)量刑規(guī)范化文件及量刑建議工作實(shí)施文件的解讀。這些文章和解讀,讓讀者了解到我國(guó)對(duì)量刑規(guī)范化下的量刑建議研究現(xiàn)狀,以及量刑建議的現(xiàn)狀及問(wèn)題,同時(shí)向讀者標(biāo)明了筆者的一些觀點(diǎn)、態(tài)度,同時(shí)還讓讀者了解到了筆者寫此文的目的。 正文第一部分是寫量刑規(guī)范化和量刑建議之間的聯(lián)系和區(qū)別,讓讀者對(duì)量刑規(guī)范化和量刑建議有個(gè)較為全面的了解。這部分分為四個(gè)方面來(lái)寫的。第一,簡(jiǎn)要對(duì)量刑規(guī)范化改革的內(nèi)容和量刑三步驟進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)的解釋,并在實(shí)踐中量刑三步驟如何操作也進(jìn)行了闡述；第二,詳細(xì)對(duì)檢察機(jī)關(guān)的量刑建議的定義和提出方法進(jìn)行了解釋,同時(shí)對(duì)量刑建議現(xiàn)在的地位進(jìn)行了描述,還把檢察機(jī)關(guān)的量刑建議和法院的量刑進(jìn)行了區(qū)分對(duì)比；第三,從量刑建議與量刑規(guī)范化的共同使命、量刑規(guī)范化對(duì)量刑建議的積極推動(dòng)和量刑建議對(duì)量刑規(guī)范化的積極推動(dòng)三個(gè)方面全方位闡述了量刑建議與量刑規(guī)范化的積極互動(dòng)；第四,從量刑建議提出要遵守“以事實(shí)為根據(jù),以法律為準(zhǔn)繩”的原則,指出量刑建議要具有客觀性、真實(shí)性,同時(shí)還指出量刑建議的幅度也有了明確化,從而反映出量刑規(guī)范化對(duì)于檢察院量刑建議的要求。 正文第二部分是本文的重點(diǎn),主要向讀者展示量刑規(guī)范化視野下的量刑建議的現(xiàn)狀,通過(guò)現(xiàn)狀反映出哪些方面的問(wèn)題,以及這些問(wèn)題、現(xiàn)狀是什么原因造成的,為能提出符合實(shí)際的改進(jìn)措施打下基礎(chǔ)。這部分圍繞量刑規(guī)范化視野下檢察機(jī)關(guān)的量刑建議的現(xiàn)狀、問(wèn)題和原因展開(kāi)分析。首先,列明了量刑建議的四個(gè)現(xiàn)狀,分別是量刑建議的提出和送達(dá)、量刑建議提出與量刑證據(jù)、采信和監(jiān)督,進(jìn)行詳細(xì)描述；其次,根據(jù)量刑建議現(xiàn)狀,指出量刑規(guī)范化視野下的量刑建議存在的問(wèn)題,分別是對(duì)裁量權(quán)研究不夠透徹,公訴人思想未改變,和量刑建議監(jiān)督機(jī)制存在問(wèn)題。最后,結(jié)合現(xiàn)狀和存在問(wèn)題找出了兩個(gè)原因,一個(gè)是檢察機(jī)關(guān)自身原因,在檢察機(jī)關(guān)自身中找出三個(gè)方面的原因,分別是檢察機(jī)關(guān)對(duì)裁量權(quán)研究甚少,對(duì)量刑規(guī)范化下地量刑建議地位改變沒(méi)有意識(shí)到和公訴人能力欠缺原因；另一個(gè)是相關(guān)因素原因,分別從三個(gè)方面：法院的對(duì)量刑規(guī)范化改革的宣傳力度不到位和落實(shí)力度不到位兩個(gè)原因,被告人自身知識(shí)欠缺的原因,和庭審制度、品格證據(jù)制度、簡(jiǎn)易程序制度、指定辯護(hù)制度四個(gè)相關(guān)制度列出多個(gè)原因。 正文第三部分結(jié)合第二部分指出的現(xiàn)狀、存在問(wèn)題和原因提出有針對(duì)性得提出量刑規(guī)范化視野下的量刑建議的改進(jìn)方法,也是本文的重點(diǎn)。這個(gè)部分從三個(gè)方面進(jìn)行的闡述。第一,從改進(jìn)相關(guān)工作制度的角度分別寫了三個(gè)方面的改進(jìn)方法,分別是將量刑建議改為量刑意見(jiàn),擴(kuò)大量刑建議送達(dá)的對(duì)象,和采取多種方式出示量刑證據(jù),規(guī)范品格證據(jù)的收集程序制度；第二,從提升公訴人能力的角度寫了兩個(gè)方面的改進(jìn)方法,分別是加強(qiáng)思想學(xué)習(xí),改變舊觀念和提升庭審現(xiàn)場(chǎng)應(yīng)對(duì)能力；第三,從完善監(jiān)督制約機(jī)制的角度寫了兩個(gè)方面的改進(jìn)方法,分別是檢察機(jī)關(guān)內(nèi)部監(jiān)督機(jī)制的建立和完善,外部監(jiān)督機(jī)制的建立。 通過(guò)本文對(duì)量刑建議的分析,實(shí)現(xiàn)量刑建議能在良性的軌道上發(fā)展,起到對(duì)量刑的監(jiān)督作用,實(shí)現(xiàn)量刑規(guī)范化改革的目的——讓量刑程序透明、公正,體現(xiàn)司法公正的最終目的。
[Abstract]:In the light of the non-standard sentencing law of the court, the judge's discretion has been too large. From May 2009, the standardized reform of sentencing in individual grass-roots courts began in May, 2010, and the sentencing standardization began in October 2010 in the national courts. According to the relevant documents issued by the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate, sentencing suggestions are introduced in court trial procedures of criminal cases, and the evidence of sentencing and debate in court debates are adduced in court investigations. As one of the bright spots in the standardized reform of sentencing, the sentencing suggestion, as one of the performance of the procuratorial organ's plea of punishment, is paid attention to by the reader. In order to supervise the sentencing suggestion, restrict the judge's discretion, let the sentencing suggestion develop on the benign track, this paper is divided into foreword, the three parts of the text are elaborated separately. The preface is to show readers the contents of some articles about sentencing suggestion and the implementation documents of sentencing standardization documents and sentencing suggestion work at the present stage Interpretation, these articles and the interpretation, let the reader understand the present situation of the sentencing suggestion research in the standardization of sentencing and the status quo and problems of sentencing suggestion, and also mark the author's opinions and attitude, and also let the reader understand the author's writing article. Objective: The first part of the text is to write the connection and difference between sentence standardization and sentencing suggestion, and let the reader have a better understanding of sentencing standardization and sentencing suggestion. A comprehensive understanding. This part is divided into four Firstly, the article explains the content of sentence standardization reform and three steps of sentencing, and expounds how to operate in practice; secondly, the definition and method of sentencing suggestion of procuratorial organ in detail; The author explains the present status of sentencing suggestion, also makes a distinction between the sentencing suggestion of procuratorial organ and the sentencing of the court, and the third is to standardize the sentencing suggestion and sentencing. On the basis of the common mission, the positive promotion and sentencing suggestion of sentencing suggestion, the positive interaction between the sentencing suggestion and the normalization of sentencing is expounded in three aspects, and the fourth part is from sentencing and construction. in ord to comply with that principle of "based on facts", It points out that the sentencing suggestion has objectivity and authenticity, and also points out that the amplitude of the sentencing suggestion is clear, which reflects the sentencing standardization to the sentencing of the prosecutor's office. The second part of the text is the focus of this paper. It mainly presents the present situation of sentencing suggestion in the visual field of sentencing, which reflects the problems in the present situation. This part lays the foundation for the improvement measures. This part is about the present situation of the sentencing suggestion of procuratorial organs in the field of sentencing standardization. First of all, the four present situations of sentencing suggestion are listed, namely the presentation and service of sentencing suggestion, the proposal of sentencing suggestion and sentencing evidence, the collection and supervision, and the detailed description; secondly, according to the present situation of sentencing suggestion, it is pointed out that the amount of sentencing standardization field of view The problem of punishment suggestion is that the research of discretion is not thorough, the public prosecutor's thought has not changed, and the sentencing suggestion is not changed. There are some problems in the supervision mechanism. In the end, two reasons are found in connection with the present situation and the existing problems. One is the reason of the procuratorial organ itself, and three reasons are found in the procuratorial organ itself, respectively. The research of discretion is very few, the change of sentencing suggestion status in the standard of sentencing is not aware of the reasons of the lack of public prosecutor's ability; the other is the reason of the relevant factors, from three aspects: the court's propaganda strength of the sentencing standardization reform is not in place and the fall strength separately. There are two reasons why the degree is not in place, the reason why the defendant's own knowledge is missing, and the trial system, the character evidence system, the summary procedure system and the appointed defense system. The third part of the text combines the status quo, the problems and the reasons pointed out in the second part to put forward the reform of sentencing suggestion in the field of sentencing standardization. The method of admission is also the focus of this article. In the first place, three improvement methods are written from the angle of improving the relevant work system, which is to change the sentencing suggestion to the sentencing opinion, expand the object of the sentencing suggestion service, and take various methods to produce the sentencing evidence and standardize the character certificate. According to the collection procedure system, two improvement methods are written from the angle of improving the ability of the public prosecutor, which is to strengthen the thought learning, change the old idea and improve the response ability of the court trial. Third, from the angle of perfecting the supervision and restriction mechanism Two improvement methods are written, which are the establishment and completion of the internal oversight mechanism of the procuratorial organ, respectively. Through the analysis of the sentencing suggestion, the author realizes that the sentencing suggestion can develop on the benign track, plays a role in the supervision of sentencing, realizes the purpose of the standardization reform of sentencing, and makes the sentencing procedure transparent.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2;D926.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 宋燕敏;;論我國(guó)量刑程序的完善[J];中國(guó)刑事法雜志;2010年03期

2 陳瑞華;;論量刑辯護(hù)[J];中國(guó)刑事法雜志;2010年08期

3 北京市人民檢察院第一分院課題組;王化軍;方潔;金鑫;;量刑監(jiān)督存在的問(wèn)題及完善[J];中國(guó)刑事法雜志;2011年03期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 上海市人民檢察院第一分院檢察長(zhǎng) 葉青;[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：2310501