發(fā)布時間：2018-06-10 15:34

  本文選題：律師在場權 + 米蘭達規(guī)則��； 參考：《太原科技大學》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：審前程序有著高度封閉性，犯罪嫌疑人在缺乏律師幫助的情形下，由于部分偵查人員素質參差不齊以及偵查目的等多方因素之影響，容易出現(xiàn)非法訊問等非法偵訊現(xiàn)象。在場權通過“米蘭達規(guī)則”的普及被世人所知，律師在場權的設置已成為現(xiàn)代刑事司法的“國際標準”，雖然我國《刑事訴訟法》對辯護權利進行了大范圍的修改，遺憾的是并沒有將律師在場這一重要的辯護權利納入，本文所要討論的即是偵查階段訊問時的律師在場權范圍。通過域外制度分析得出，律師在場制度設置的立足點并不在于抑制非法偵訊，其目的意義在于保障犯罪嫌疑人的供述自愿，不受公權機關的強力迫使。借此次我國刑訴法修改之際，關于在場權設置基礎的辯護權利愈加完善，還有法援制度以及其他訊問措施的有力支持，筆者通過對我國偵查結構以及審前程序之特點分析，并借鑒國外相關優(yōu)秀的制度設計，限定了在場權的漸進式發(fā)展的案件范圍，明確在場律師的權利義務，確定了在不同案件中，在場權與沉默權和錄音錄像方式的協(xié)作方式，，逐步推進在場權的案件覆蓋范圍。
[Abstract]:Pretrial procedure is highly closed, criminal suspects in the absence of lawyers to help, due to the uneven quality of some investigators and investigation purposes and other factors, such as illegal interrogation and other illegal investigation. The right to present has been widely known by the world through the "Miranda rule", and the establishment of the right to be present by lawyers has become the "international standard" of modern criminal justice, although the Criminal procedure Law of our country has amended the right of defense in a wide range. Unfortunately, the important defense right of lawyer's presence is not included in this article, which is to discuss the scope of lawyer's right to be present in the investigation stage. Through the analysis of the extraterritorial system, it is concluded that the foothold of the lawyer's presence system is not to suppress the illegal investigation, but to ensure the criminal suspect's voluntary confession and not to be forced by the public authority. On the occasion of the revision of the Criminal procedure Law of our country, the defense right on the basis of setting up the right to present is becoming more and more perfect, as well as the strong support of the legal aid system and other interrogation measures. The author analyzes the characteristics of the investigation structure and the pretrial procedure of our country through the analysis of the legal aid system and other interrogation measures. And draw lessons from the foreign relevant excellent system design, limit the case scope of progressive development of the right to the scene, clarify the rights and obligations of the lawyers present, determine the right to be present and the right to silence in different cases, and the way of cooperation between the right to be present and the right to silence and the way of audio and video recording. The case coverage of the right to be present should be gradually advanced.
【學位授予單位】：太原科技大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.2

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 陳光中;卞建林;陳衛(wèi)東;宋英輝;李晶;;《刑事訴訟法》修改專家筆談[J];中國司法;2012年05期

2 熊秋紅;審前程序中的律師辯護權[J];法律科學.西北政法學院學報;2004年05期

3 樊崇義;;《刑事訴訟法》再修改的理性思考(下)[J];法學雜志;2008年02期

4 楊宇冠;;《刑事訴訟法》修改凸顯人權保障——論不得強迫自證有罪和非法證據(jù)排除條款[J];法學雜志;2012年05期

5 陳瑞華;;論被告人口供規(guī)則[J];法學雜志;2012年06期

6 黃振中;;論新中國律師的性質變化與轉型期之定位[J];法學評論;2010年04期

7 孫長永;;偵查階段律師辯護制度立法的三大疑難問題管見[J];法學;2008年07期

8 汪建成;;論未成年人犯罪訴訟程序的建立和完善[J];法學;2012年01期

9 盧恩光;李奮飛;;偵查訊問程序改革研究[J];廣西社會科學;2007年05期

10 朱奎彬;;比較與實證:律師訊問在場權透視[J];四川大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2008年03期

本文編號：2003716