本文選題：事實(shí)證據(jù)確認(rèn) + 詢問(wèn)告知�。� 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序，是指人民法院在開(kāi)庭前，對(duì)刑事案件進(jìn)行審查，并決定是否按照簡(jiǎn)易程序進(jìn)行審理的訴訟程序。如果適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定不當(dāng)，一方面會(huì)損害被告人合法訴訟權(quán)利，增加被告人被錯(cuò)判的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，不利于防止錯(cuò)案，有損訴訟公正；另一方面則難以避免簡(jiǎn)易程序轉(zhuǎn)為普通程序等程序倒流，無(wú)法實(shí)現(xiàn)簡(jiǎn)易程序的效率價(jià)值。因此，對(duì)適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序進(jìn)行研究，既有助于防止錯(cuò)誤或者不當(dāng)適用簡(jiǎn)易程序，保障被告人人權(quán)，實(shí)現(xiàn)訴訟公正，又有利于保障刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序順利運(yùn)行，實(shí)現(xiàn)刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的效率價(jià)值。 本文由引言、正文和結(jié)語(yǔ)組成。正文分為三個(gè)部分，共38000余字。 第一部分論述適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序的內(nèi)涵和功能。適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序，是基層人民法院對(duì)其受理的刑事案件，經(jīng)依法審查和確認(rèn)，對(duì)案件作出是否適用簡(jiǎn)易程序決定時(shí)應(yīng)當(dāng)遵守的程序。2012年《刑事訴訟法》重新設(shè)定了刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序適用的條件，但沒(méi)有規(guī)定人民法院作出適用簡(jiǎn)易程序決定的程序。最高人民法院司法解釋對(duì)此進(jìn)行了補(bǔ)充。它成為人民法院作出適用簡(jiǎn)易程序決定的程序依據(jù)。以人民法院的訴訟行為為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序可以分為三個(gè)子程序，分別是：事實(shí)證據(jù)條件確認(rèn)程序、詢問(wèn)告知程序和作出決定程序。適用簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序作為適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的開(kāi)端，其正確與否，對(duì)于防止因簡(jiǎn)易程序適用不當(dāng)而出現(xiàn)錯(cuò)案，實(shí)現(xiàn)簡(jiǎn)易程序的效率價(jià)值，具有重要的功能意義。 第二部分論述適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序的運(yùn)行狀況。適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序在實(shí)際操作中存在的問(wèn)題，分布在各個(gè)子程序中，需要逐個(gè)分析，各個(gè)擊破。在通過(guò)閱卷確認(rèn)適用簡(jiǎn)易程序的事實(shí)證據(jù)條件方面，存在的問(wèn)題有：一是法官的確認(rèn)走過(guò)場(chǎng)，缺少實(shí)質(zhì)確認(rèn)過(guò)程；二是法官用以確認(rèn)的參閱材料失衡，控方影響大于辯方；三是確認(rèn)時(shí)慣用一人自由裁量，有失公正；四是確認(rèn)結(jié)果缺少形式固定，確認(rèn)易被架空。這些問(wèn)題影響法院確認(rèn)的公正性。在通過(guò)詢問(wèn)和告知確認(rèn)被告人認(rèn)罪和同意適用簡(jiǎn)易程序方面，存在的問(wèn)題有：一是法院對(duì)“認(rèn)罪與否”的詢問(wèn)缺少參照材料，問(wèn)答形式有瑕疵，對(duì)“對(duì)指控的犯罪事實(shí)有無(wú)異議”詢問(wèn)時(shí)，參照的起訴書材料有缺陷，詢問(wèn)中會(huì)有不當(dāng)“質(zhì)證”的踩界行為；二是被告人同意適用簡(jiǎn)易程序的答復(fù)有失明智基礎(chǔ)；三是法院的操作活動(dòng)粗糙不當(dāng)，影響詢問(wèn)的質(zhì)量；四是法律漏洞在此凸顯，證據(jù)和程序問(wèn)題亟需在這個(gè)階段解決。這部分問(wèn)題突出，是改正的重點(diǎn)。在作出決定程序方面存在的問(wèn)題有：一是作出決定的時(shí)間和方式不統(tǒng)一，無(wú)法兼顧司法權(quán)威和決定的靈活特征；二是發(fā)出通知和接受異議的操作有不當(dāng)之處，可行性不足。開(kāi)庭前最后一層濾網(wǎng)有失公正，仍存在程序中斷和變更的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。 第三部分論述適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序的缺陷，并提出完善的長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)構(gòu)想和近期思路。適用刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序，具有法治化程度不足和行政化色彩較濃兩大缺陷，是實(shí)踐操作出現(xiàn)問(wèn)題的原因所在。從長(zhǎng)遠(yuǎn)來(lái)看，庭前會(huì)議將成為刑事訴訟的必經(jīng)程序，將簡(jiǎn)易程序的決定程序與之合二為一，是未來(lái)程序改進(jìn)與立法完善的趨勢(shì)。在當(dāng)前立法框架下，應(yīng)當(dāng)從三個(gè)子程序內(nèi)部入手，對(duì)癥下藥。對(duì)事實(shí)證據(jù)條件確認(rèn)程序，建議從以下四個(gè)方面加以改進(jìn)：一是完善刑事案件分流，提高案件質(zhì)量，收縮案件數(shù)量，保證人民法院進(jìn)行實(shí)質(zhì)審查的材料基礎(chǔ)和精力基礎(chǔ)；二是平衡控辯武裝，打開(kāi)辯方言路，提高卷宗質(zhì)量，保證審判人員兼聽(tīng)則明；三是規(guī)范法官行為，引入審查確認(rèn)的簡(jiǎn)式“合議”機(jī)制，制作案情確認(rèn)書，敦促實(shí)質(zhì)審查和公正判斷；四是建立科學(xué)的績(jī)效考評(píng)機(jī)制，為法院減壓，，保證法官操作的正當(dāng)性。對(duì)認(rèn)罪和指控事實(shí)確認(rèn)程序以及適用簡(jiǎn)易程序的確認(rèn)程序，應(yīng)當(dāng)從以下三個(gè)方面加以改進(jìn)：一是提升被告人的主體地位，適度解凍閱卷權(quán)，保證法定代理人和辯護(hù)人的在場(chǎng)權(quán)，確保被告人答復(fù)的明智基礎(chǔ)；二是完善法定適用條件，將實(shí)踐反饋的“證據(jù)異議”和“程序異議”納入詢問(wèn)告知程序的范疇，避免問(wèn)題后發(fā)對(duì)訴訟效率的損害；三是規(guī)范法院行為，在詢問(wèn)人員、程序、詢問(wèn)提綱及語(yǔ)言技巧等方面，提高詢問(wèn)的科學(xué)性和客觀性。對(duì)作出決定程序，應(yīng)當(dāng)從以下三個(gè)方面加以改進(jìn)：一是統(tǒng)一作出決定操作，將作出決定的時(shí)間統(tǒng)一于詢問(wèn)告知之后，且決定要以書面形式作出；二是及時(shí)通知檢察院和辯護(hù)人，通知的載體在二者中要有所區(qū)分；三是規(guī)范異議回饋，既要保證檢察院法律監(jiān)督的中立合法，又要保證辯方異議的暢通正當(dāng)。前面的程序越公正，決定后的異議就越少，簡(jiǎn)易程序的開(kāi)啟就越順利。規(guī)范各程序的目的，在于保證刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序適用正當(dāng)和效率價(jià)值的有效發(fā)揮。
[Abstract]:The decision procedure for the application of criminal summary procedure means that the people's court review the criminal cases before the court and decide whether to try the proceedings in accordance with the summary procedure. If the decision to apply the criminal summary procedure is improper, it will damage the right of the defendant's legal proceedings and increase the risk of the defendant's miscarriage, and is not conducive to the prevention of the criminal summary procedure. On the other hand, it is difficult to avoid the reverse flow of summary procedure to ordinary procedure and the efficiency value of summary procedure can not be realized on the other hand. Therefore, the study of the decision procedure for the application of criminal summary procedure is helpful to prevent errors or improper use of summary procedure, safeguard the rights of the defendant and realize the public lawsuit It is also conducive to ensuring the smooth operation of the criminal summary procedure and achieving the efficiency value of the criminal summary procedure.
This paper is composed of an introduction, a body and a conclusion. The text is divided into three parts, with a total of 38000 words.
The first part discusses the connotation and function of the decision procedure for the application of criminal summary procedure. The decision procedure for the application of criminal summary procedure is the reestablishment of the procedure of the criminal procedure of.2012 "the criminal procedure law" for the criminal cases accepted by the people's court at the grass-roots level. The conditions for the application of the criminal summary procedure, but there are no provisions for the people's court to make the decision to apply the summary procedure. The judicial interpretation of the Supreme People's court has been supplemented. It becomes the procedural basis for the decision of the people's court to apply the summary procedure. The decision procedure for the application of the criminal summary procedure in the case of the people's court is the standard. It can be divided into three sub programs: the confirmation procedure of fact evidence condition, the procedure of asking and the procedure of making the decision. The decision procedure of the application of summary procedure is the beginning of the application of criminal summary procedure. It is correct or not, to prevent the misuse of the simple procedure and to realize the efficiency value of the simple procedure. Functional meaning.
The second part discusses the operation status of the decision procedure for the application of criminal summary procedure. The problems existing in the practical operation of the decision procedure for the application of criminal summary procedure are distributed in each subprogram. It needs to be analyzed and broken by one by one. It is the judge's confirmation pass through the field and lack of substantive confirmation process; two is the unbalance of the referenced material used by the judge, the influence of the prosecution is greater than the defense; the three is to use one person's discretion and unfairness at the time of confirmation; four is the confirmation result is lack of form and the confirmation is easy to be put on the shelf. And to inform the defendant that the defendant plead guilty and agree to apply the summary procedure, there are problems: first, the court's question of "pleading guilty or not" is short of reference material, the form of question and answer is flawed, and the reference material is defective when asking "the facts of the crime on the accused", and there will be an improper "quality certificate" in the inquiry. The two is that the reply of the defendant agrees to the application of the summary procedure with the intellectual foundation of blindness; the three is the improper operation of the court, which affects the quality of the inquiry; four is the legal loophole in which the problem is highlighted, and the problem of evidence and procedure needs to be solved at this stage. This part of the problem is the focus of the correction. There exists in the decision procedure. The problems are: first, the time and way of making the decision are not unified, and the flexible characteristics of judicial authority and decision can not be taken into account. Two, the operation of giving notice and accepting dissent is improper, and the feasibility is insufficient. The last layer of filter net before the court is unfair and there is still the risk of the interruption and change of the procedure.
The third part discusses the defects of the decision procedure for the application of criminal summary procedure, and puts forward a perfect long-term conception and recent thought. The decision procedure for the application of criminal summary procedure has two major defects in the lack of rule of law and strong administrative color. It is the reason for the problems in practice. In the long run, the pre court meeting will become The compulsory procedure of criminal procedure, which combines the decision procedure of summary procedure with it, is the trend of improving the procedure and perfecting the legislation in the future. Under the current legislative framework, we should start from the three sub procedures and give the remedy to the case. It is suggested that the following four aspects should be improved: one is to improve the criminal case. Distributary, improve the quality of cases, contract the number of cases, guarantee the material basis and energy basis for the people's court to carry out substantive examination; two is to balance the armed defense and defense, open the dialectal Road, improve the quality of the files, and ensure that the judicial personnel listen to it, and the three is to standardize the judge's behavior and introduce the simple "collegial" mechanism of examination and confirmation to make confirmation of the case confirmation. Book, urging substantive examination and fair judgment; four is to establish a scientific performance appraisal mechanism, to reduce the court's relief and to ensure the justification of the judge's operation. The following three aspects should be improved: first, to improve the main body status of the accused and moderate thawing reading. To guarantee the right of presence of legal agents and defenders, to ensure the informed basis for the reply of the defendant; two to improve the legal application conditions, to incorporate the "evidence objection" and "procedural objection" into the category of the procedure of inquiring and notification, to avoid the damage to the efficiency of the lawsuit after the problem; and the three is to standardize the court behavior and inquire the personnel. We should improve the scientificity and objectivity of the inquiry, and improve the scientificalness and objectivity of the inquiry. To make the decision procedure, we should improve it from the following three aspects: first, to make a unified decision on the operation, to unify the time of decision, and to make a decision in writing; and the two is to notify the procuratorate and the argument in time. To protect the people, the carrier of the notice should be distinguished among the two; the three is to standardize the objection and feedback, not only to guarantee the neutrality of the legal supervision of the procuratorate, but also to ensure the unimpeded and legitimate objection of the defense. The more impartiality of the preceding procedure, the less the objection after the decision, the more smooth the opening of the summary procedure is, the purpose of standardizing the procedures is to guarantee the criminal Jane. The easy procedure is applicable to the proper and efficient value.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王圣揚(yáng);楊國(guó)萍;;辯護(hù)律師與刑事法官關(guān)系論[J];安徽大學(xué)法律評(píng)論;2010年01期

2 劉根菊;李利君;;刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序比較研究[J];比較法研究;2009年05期

3 崔鵬;董桂武;;關(guān)于我國(guó)刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的完善[J];法律適用;2009年04期

4 徐美君;;重罪簡(jiǎn)易程序研究——以《若干意見(jiàn)(試行)》為考察對(duì)象[J];法商研究;2006年02期

5 姚莉;認(rèn)罪后的訴訟程序——簡(jiǎn)易程序與辯訴交易的協(xié)調(diào)與適用[J];法學(xué);2002年12期

6 潘金貴;;偵訴協(xié)作:我國(guó)檢警關(guān)系改革的目標(biāo)模式[J];甘肅社會(huì)科學(xué);2008年04期

7 高一飛;刑事簡(jiǎn)易程序的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年03期

8 李昌林;;刑事訴訟模式的立法選擇[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年02期

9 葉蓮,梁文,周蹈;廣西法院系統(tǒng)適用簡(jiǎn)易程序的調(diào)查與分析[J];廣西政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年01期

10 黃琪;謝銳勤;;看得見(jiàn)的正義:刑事被告人知悉制度透視——以法院/法官的行動(dòng)選擇為視角[J];法律適用;2013年02期

本文編號(hào)：2070764