發(fā)布時間：2018-06-15 09:11

  本文選題：刑事瑕疵證據(jù) + 適用�。� 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：瑕疵證據(jù)作為一種介于合法證據(jù)與非法證據(jù)之間的特殊的證據(jù)形式,在我國的司法實(shí)踐中一直廣泛存在,但是由于長期以來我國關(guān)于瑕疵證據(jù)的法律規(guī)定存在空白,使得對于瑕疵證據(jù)的研究只是停留在理論層面,并且研究的深度與廣度遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不如對非法證據(jù)的研究成熟和完善。《關(guān)于辦理死刑案件審查判斷證據(jù)若干問題的規(guī)定》(下文稱《辦理死刑案件證據(jù)規(guī)定》)和《關(guān)于辦理刑事案件排除非法證據(jù)若干問題的規(guī)定》(下文稱《非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)定》)的出臺(統(tǒng)稱為“兩個《證據(jù)規(guī)定》”),使得我國對刑事瑕疵證據(jù)相關(guān)問題的研究不再是無源之水,而是具備了法律上的依據(jù)和基礎(chǔ)。本文參考“兩個《證據(jù)規(guī)定》”的相關(guān)條文,通過五個部分的內(nèi)容對刑事瑕疵證據(jù)適用的相關(guān)問題進(jìn)行了闡述： 第一部分介紹了刑事瑕疵證據(jù)的界定,首先,筆者列舉了目前學(xué)界關(guān)于瑕疵證據(jù)概念的幾種有代表性的觀點(diǎn),然后通過對各種觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行評析,進(jìn)而對瑕疵證據(jù)的概念做出了界定。其次,從客觀性、關(guān)聯(lián)性、輕微違法性和可轉(zhuǎn)化性四個維度介紹了瑕疵證據(jù)所具有的特點(diǎn),接下來通過將瑕疵證據(jù)和非法證據(jù)作對比,指出瑕疵證據(jù)和非法證據(jù)之間的區(qū)別和聯(lián)系。最后,為加深對瑕疵證據(jù)的理解和認(rèn)識,對其進(jìn)行了簡單的分類。 第二部分通過簡要分析我國、德國、美國和其他幾個主要國家在司法實(shí)踐中對瑕疵證據(jù)持寬容態(tài)度,說明刑事瑕疵證據(jù)在兩大法系國家中都有適用的空間,并且刑事瑕疵證據(jù)的適用是各種價值相互作用的結(jié)果,其存在價值可以從司法公正與訴訟效率之統(tǒng)一、嚴(yán)格證明與自由證明之融合、實(shí)體正義與程序正義之平衡這三個角度進(jìn)行考里。 第三部分主要是對瑕疵證據(jù)的證據(jù)能力問題進(jìn)行探析。對于瑕疵證據(jù)的證據(jù)能力問題,學(xué)界的觀點(diǎn)概括起來主要有完全排除說、全面肯定說、折中說、補(bǔ)正說四種。筆者分別對四種觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了評析,并且贊同補(bǔ)正說主張的瑕疵證據(jù)的證據(jù)能力效力待定的觀點(diǎn)。另外筆者從契約的角度對瑕疵證據(jù)的證據(jù)能力進(jìn)行探討,對構(gòu)建證據(jù)能力契約使瑕疵證據(jù)具備證據(jù)能力進(jìn)行可行性分析,以新的視角再論瑕疵證據(jù)的證據(jù)能力效力待定。 第四部分對我國刑事瑕疵證據(jù)在立法層面的不完善之處和在司法實(shí)踐過程中適用時可能存在的問題進(jìn)行探討。立法層面我國存在著瑕疵證據(jù)的適用范圍過于狹窄、與非法證據(jù)的界限模糊、轉(zhuǎn)化方式不具體、法律對適用程序無明確規(guī)定等問題。司法實(shí)踐層面,以王朝搶劫案為引子,分析了司法實(shí)踐中存在的偵查機(jī)關(guān)依法取證意識不強(qiáng)、瑕疵證據(jù)采納標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不統(tǒng)一、人權(quán)保障不到位、公檢法機(jī)關(guān)對瑕疵證據(jù)轉(zhuǎn)化的主動性不足等問題。 第五部分對完善我國刑事瑕疵證據(jù)的適用提出建議。首先,在將瑕疵證據(jù)應(yīng)用于司法實(shí)踐的過程中,遵循宏觀的原則是非常有必要的,與此同時,必須明確瑕疵證據(jù)在轉(zhuǎn)化過程中應(yīng)當(dāng)具有可操作性的規(guī)則。其次,要保障被追訴人的知情權(quán)和辯護(hù)律師充分行使權(quán)利,并且要實(shí)現(xiàn)偵查權(quán)的優(yōu)化配置。再次,參照非法證據(jù)排除的規(guī)定,明確了瑕疵證據(jù)轉(zhuǎn)化的程序。最后,要對相關(guān)的配套措施加以完善。
[Abstract]:As a kind of special evidence between legal evidence and illegal evidence , the evidence of flaw lies in the judicial practice of our country .

The first part introduces the definition of the evidence of criminal flaws . First , the author lists several representative opinions about the concept of flaw evidence , then defines the concept of the flaw evidence . Secondly , the author points out the differences and connections between the flaw evidence and the illegal evidence from the four dimensions of objectivity , relevance , minor illegality and convertible . Finally , it makes a simple classification to deepen the understanding and understanding of the flaw evidence .

In the second part , the author analyzes our country , Germany , the United States and several other major countries in the judicial practice . It shows that the evidence of criminal flaw lies in the two countries of the law system , and the application of the evidence of criminal flaw lies in the result of the interaction of various values . The existence value of the evidence can be divided into three aspects : the unification of the judicial fairness and the efficiency of the litigation , the strict proof and the balance of the entity justice and the procedural justice .

The third part mainly probes into the evidence ability of the flaw evidence . In view of the evidence ability of the flaw evidence , the view of the academic circle is generally ruled out , and the author points out that there are four kinds of evidence . In addition , the author discusses the four opinions , and agrees with the viewpoint that the evidence ability of the evidence of the flaw lies to be determined . In addition , the author discusses the evidence ability of the evidence ability contract from the angle of contract , and makes a feasibility analysis on the evidence ability of the evidence ability contract , and then discusses the evidence ability of the flaw evidence with the new visual angle .

The fourth part discusses the imperfection of the evidence of criminal flaw in our country and the possible problems in the course of judicial practice .

The fifth part makes some suggestions on perfecting the application of the evidence of criminal flaw in China . First , it is necessary to follow the macro principle in the process of applying the flaw evidence to the judicial practice . At the same time , it is necessary to make clear the rules of the maneuverability in the process of transformation . Secondly , to guarantee the right of the person to be prosecuted and the defense lawyer to fully exercise their rights , and to realize the optimal disposition of the investigation right .
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.23

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 萬毅;;論瑕疵證據(jù)——以“兩個《證據(jù)規(guī)定》”為分析對象[J];法商研究;2011年05期

2 楊解君;契約文化的變遷及其啟示(下)——契約理念在公法中的確立[J];法學(xué)評論;2005年01期

3 申夫,石英;刑事訴訟中“瑕疵證據(jù)”的法律效力探討[J];法學(xué)評論;1998年05期

4 李忠勇;;對于完善刑事瑕疵證據(jù)補(bǔ)救制度的思考——以某中級法院普通刑事案件判決為樣本[J];法律適用;2013年02期

5 肖軍;;淺析德國刑事訴訟法上的證據(jù)禁止制度[J];河南公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報;2009年02期

6 許江濤;試論刑事訴訟中的瑕疵證據(jù)[J];洛陽師范學(xué)院學(xué)報;2002年04期

7 龍宗智;;立足中國實(shí)際有效遏制非法取證[J];人民檢察;2006年24期

8 楊玲;;試論刑事訴訟瑕疵證據(jù)及其證明力[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報;2002年03期

9 陳瑞華;;程序性制裁制度的法理學(xué)分析[J];中國法學(xué);2005年06期

10 牟逍媛;談訴訟經(jīng)濟(jì)原則[J];政治與法律;1998年05期

，

本文編號：2021506