發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-03-26 22:02

  本文選題：美國(guó)　切入點(diǎn)：錯(cuò)案　出處：《西南大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：刑事錯(cuò)案是刑事司法活動(dòng)中客觀存在的一種現(xiàn)象,中國(guó)和西方都對(duì)其有所研究。雖然無(wú)法得知現(xiàn)在是否正在發(fā)生、發(fā)現(xiàn)錯(cuò)案,將來(lái)是否還會(huì)發(fā)生或者發(fā)現(xiàn)錯(cuò)案,這是社會(huì)科學(xué)上的“暗數(shù)”,但能夠追蹤分析、評(píng)價(jià)已經(jīng)發(fā)現(xiàn)的歷史上的錯(cuò)案。筆者收集和分析了大量統(tǒng)計(jì)資料和案例,梳理了美國(guó)刑事錯(cuò)案和刑案致錯(cuò)相關(guān)研究的概況；對(duì)共同成因和辯訴交易中錯(cuò)案的特殊成因進(jìn)行了系統(tǒng)的闡述；并進(jìn)一步探討了美國(guó)對(duì)諸多致錯(cuò)因素的控制手段。 在認(rèn)真考察和深度分析美國(guó)刑事錯(cuò)案成因和防控機(jī)制之后,不難看出實(shí)踐中的當(dāng)事人主義的刑事訴訟程序中依然存在許多非中立、非理性、不平等的因素,并非都實(shí)現(xiàn)了憲法至尊至上的權(quán)威和維護(hù)了正當(dāng)程序；當(dāng)事人主義刑事訴訟模式并不完全是“寧可錯(cuò)放十個(gè)罪犯也不誤判一個(gè)無(wú)辜”。當(dāng)我們深入到“刑事錯(cuò)案”領(lǐng)域,研究美國(guó)一樁樁錯(cuò)案從如何暗暗發(fā)生、慣性推進(jìn),到艱難糾正的完整過(guò)程后,就豁然明了：每種刑事司法制度的優(yōu)點(diǎn)可能相同或不同,但每種刑事司法制度的缺陷卻驚人相似。對(duì)當(dāng)事人主義刑事訴訟模式的某種迷信應(yīng)予破除。 美國(guó)法學(xué)界對(duì)刑事錯(cuò)案的研究角度和研究方法之于中國(guó)法學(xué)界仍頗富啟示意義：①可將研究視野和研究方法突破單一刑事司法的范圍和路徑,從傳統(tǒng)的刑法和刑事訴訟角度研究刑事錯(cuò)案問(wèn)題,轉(zhuǎn)向從社會(huì)學(xué)、犯罪學(xué)、刑事政策學(xué)、社會(huì)控制理論乃至警察學(xué)、檢察官學(xué)和司法倫理學(xué)、被害人學(xué)等等方面,綜合研究刑事錯(cuò)案的發(fā)生、演變和救濟(jì)；②從注重錯(cuò)案的個(gè)案特征和一般性成因、救濟(jì)方式的分析,轉(zhuǎn)到注視刑事司法制度乃至國(guó)家的政治因素對(duì)錯(cuò)案形成及救濟(jì)的深刻影響；③刑事錯(cuò)案研究有可能逐步成為一門(mén)相對(duì)獨(dú)立的學(xué)科,一如被害人學(xué)的成長(zhǎng)一樣。在美國(guó),刑事錯(cuò)案研究已經(jīng)有比較完整的邏輯體系,從研究對(duì)象、理論闡釋框架到政策分析,都自成體系。 當(dāng)然,在中國(guó),刑事錯(cuò)案研究亦很可能如同在美國(guó),它將與整個(gè)刑事司法控制問(wèn)題研究相結(jié)合,并展開(kāi)自己的理論和實(shí)踐功能。相應(yīng)的,中國(guó)不應(yīng)盲目期望西方的司法制度包治百病,而應(yīng)重視自身的社會(huì)文化和歷史底蘊(yùn),從長(zhǎng)期存在的哲學(xué)價(jià)值追求中去呼吸新生的起點(diǎn),并在此基礎(chǔ)之上思考刑事司法制度的改良機(jī)制。 簡(jiǎn)言之,當(dāng)事人主義刑事訴訟雖然是人類法治文明的代表之一,但是并非盡善盡美,并不天然就是榜樣。美國(guó)刑事司法的難題,就是在繼續(xù)保障基本公正的前提下如何提高效率,更好的保障人權(quán),不出錯(cuò)案。保障無(wú)辜者不受刑事追究,不錯(cuò)判、錯(cuò)關(guān)、錯(cuò)殺,是中美刑事司法共同面臨的問(wèn)題,絕不是中國(guó)獨(dú)有的問(wèn)題。中美刑事司法既有各自的問(wèn)題,也有共同難題；解決的路徑必定各不相同,指望“中西合璧”不必要也不可行。
[Abstract]:Criminal malpractice is an objective phenomenon in criminal justice activities, which is studied by both China and the West. Although it is impossible to know whether it is happening or not, whether it will happen or not in the future. This is the "dark number" in social science, but can track and analyze and evaluate the historical error cases that have been found. The author collects and analyzes a large number of statistical data and cases, and combs the general situation of the related research on the criminal error and criminal error in the United States; This paper systematically expounds the common cause and the special cause of error in plea bargaining, and further probes into the control means of many wrong factors in the United States. After careful investigation and in-depth analysis of the causes and prevention and control mechanism of criminal error cases in the United States, it is not difficult to see that there are still many non-neutral, irrational and unequal factors in the criminal procedure of party doctrine in practice. Not all of them have achieved the authority of the supremacy of the Constitution and upheld due process; the criminal procedure model of party doctrine is not entirely "better to misplace ten criminals than to misjudge an innocent person." when we go deep into the field of "criminal error," After studying how a wrong case in the United States occurs in the dark, in inertia, and in a complete process of hard correction, it becomes clear that the advantages of each criminal justice system may be the same or different. However, the defects of each criminal justice system are surprisingly similar. The angle and method of the research on criminal error cases in the American legal circles are still quite enlightening to the Chinese legal circles, which can break through the scope and path of the single criminal judicature from the perspective of research and research methods. From the perspective of traditional criminal law and criminal procedure, the study of criminal error cases has shifted from sociology, criminology, criminal policy theory, social control theory to even police science, procuratorial science and judicial ethics, victim science and so on. A comprehensive study of the occurrence, evolution and relief of criminal misdemeanors from the perspective of the case characteristics and general causes, and the analysis of relief methods, Turning to the profound influence of the political factors in the criminal justice system and even the country on the formation and remedy of misdemeanours the study of criminal misdemeanours is likely to gradually become a relatively independent discipline, just as the victimology has grown. In the United States, There is a relatively complete logic system in the research of criminal error cases, from the object of study, the framework of theoretical interpretation to the analysis of policy. Of course, in China, as in the United States, the study of criminal error cases is likely to be combined with the entire study of criminal justice control, and to develop its own theoretical and practical functions. China should not blindly expect the western judicial system to cure all diseases, but should attach importance to its own social culture and historical details, and breathe the starting point of a new life from the long-existing pursuit of philosophical value. On the basis of this, the author thinks about the improvement mechanism of criminal justice system. In short, although litigant criminal proceedings are one of the representatives of human civilization of the rule of law, they are not perfect, nor are they natural role models. That is, under the premise of continuing to guarantee basic justice, how to improve efficiency, better protect human rights and not go wrong in criminal cases. Protecting innocent people from criminal prosecution, not misjudging, wrong customs, wrong killing, is a common problem that China and the United States face in criminal justice. Criminal justice in China and the United States have their own problems as well as common problems, and the paths to solve them must be different, so it is not necessary or feasible to expect the "Chinese and Western elements" to be combined.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D971.2;D915.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 王曦;;失衡與矯正:程序至上主義——以美國(guó)刑事訴訟為視角[J];中國(guó)檢察官;2009年12期

2 秦學(xué)儉;;檢察人員的證據(jù)意識(shí)與刑事錯(cuò)案的預(yù)防[J];中國(guó)檢察官;2010年14期

3 馬克昌;;提升公信力須嚴(yán)格依法辦事[J];人民檢察;2009年23期

4 周偉;解讀美國(guó)辯訴交易制度[J];政法論壇;2002年06期

5 陳永生;;死刑與誤判——以美國(guó)68%的死刑誤判率為出發(fā)點(diǎn)[J];政法論壇;2007年01期

6 吳常青;;美國(guó)刑事訴訟中撤回起訴及其借鑒意義[J];中國(guó)刑事法雜志;2010年04期

7 劉品新;;當(dāng)代英美刑事錯(cuò)案的實(shí)證研究[J];國(guó)家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1669763