量刑规范化视野下检察院量刑建议的研究

发布时间：2018-11-04 16:47

【摘要】：针对法院量刑不规范,法官自由裁量权过大的问题,从2009年5月开始在个别基层法院试点量刑规范化改革,在2010年10月开始在全国法院全面试行量刑规范化。根据最高人民法院、最高人民检察院出台的相关文件规定,刑事案件的法庭庭审程序中引入量刑建议,并在法庭调查中举证量刑证据和在法庭辩论中辩论。作为创新的量刑规范化改革中的亮点之一——量刑建议,作为检察机关求刑权的表现之一,受读者关注。为了让量刑建议起到监督、制约法官自由裁量权的作用,让量刑建议在良性轨道上发展,本文中分为前言、正文的三个部分进行分别阐述。前言是向读者展示了现阶段我国学者研究量刑建议的部分文章的内容和对量刑规范化文件及量刑建议工作实施文件的解读。这些文章和解读,让读者了解到我国对量刑规范化下的量刑建议研究现状,以及量刑建议的现状及问题,同时向读者标明了笔者的一些观点、态度,同时还让读者了解到了笔者写此文的目的。正文第一部分是写量刑规范化和量刑建议之间的联系和区别,让读者对量刑规范化和量刑建议有个较为全面的了解。这部分分为四个方面来写的。第一,简要对量刑规范化改革的内容和量刑三步骤进行了详细的解释,并在实践中量刑三步骤如何操作也进行了阐述；第二,详细对检察机关的量刑建议的定义和提出方法进行了解释,同时对量刑建议现在的地位进行了描述,还把检察机关的量刑建议和法院的量刑进行了区分对比；第三,从量刑建议与量刑规范化的共同使命、量刑规范化对量刑建议的积极推动和量刑建议对量刑规范化的积极推动三个方面全方位阐述了量刑建议与量刑规范化的积极互动；第四,从量刑建议提出要遵守“以事实为根据,以法律为准绳”的原则,指出量刑建议要具有客观性、真实性,同时还指出量刑建议的幅度也有了明确化,从而反映出量刑规范化对于检察院量刑建议的要求。正文第二部分是本文的重点,主要向读者展示量刑规范化视野下的量刑建议的现状,通过现状反映出哪些方面的问题,以及这些问题、现状是什么原因造成的,为能提出符合实际的改进措施打下基础。这部分围绕量刑规范化视野下检察机关的量刑建议的现状、问题和原因展开分析。首先,列明了量刑建议的四个现状,分别是量刑建议的提出和送达、量刑建议提出与量刑证据、采信和监督,进行详细描述；其次,根据量刑建议现状,指出量刑规范化视野下的量刑建议存在的问题,分别是对裁量权研究不够透彻,公诉人思想未改变,和量刑建议监督机制存在问题。最后,结合现状和存在问题找出了两个原因,一个是检察机关自身原因,在检察机关自身中找出三个方面的原因,分别是检察机关对裁量权研究甚少,对量刑规范化下地量刑建议地位改变没有意识到和公诉人能力欠缺原因；另一个是相关因素原因,分别从三个方面：法院的对量刑规范化改革的宣传力度不到位和落实力度不到位两个原因,被告人自身知识欠缺的原因,和庭审制度、品格证据制度、简易程序制度、指定辩护制度四个相关制度列出多个原因。正文第三部分结合第二部分指出的现状、存在问题和原因提出有针对性得提出量刑规范化视野下的量刑建议的改进方法,也是本文的重点。这个部分从三个方面进行的阐述。第一,从改进相关工作制度的角度分别写了三个方面的改进方法,分别是将量刑建议改为量刑意见,扩大量刑建议送达的对象,和采取多种方式出示量刑证据,规范品格证据的收集程序制度；第二,从提升公诉人能力的角度写了两个方面的改进方法,分别是加强思想学习,改变旧观念和提升庭审现场应对能力；第三,从完善监督制约机制的角度写了两个方面的改进方法,分别是检察机关内部监督机制的建立和完善,外部监督机制的建立。通过本文对量刑建议的分析,实现量刑建议能在良性的轨道上发展,起到对量刑的监督作用,实现量刑规范化改革的目的——让量刑程序透明、公正,体现司法公正的最终目的。
[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.
【学位授予单位】：西南财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D925.2;D926.3

【参考文献】