本文選題：毒品案件 + 刑事法律　； 參考：《蘭州大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：案例指導(dǎo)制度也是伴隨著刑事法律不統(tǒng)一現(xiàn)象逐漸被法律界人士所關(guān)注,“同案同判”是其最通俗的表達(dá)。將案例上升為明確的制度的方式,發(fā)揮指導(dǎo)性作用對(duì)統(tǒng)一刑事法律適用。在現(xiàn)在有制度范疇和現(xiàn)行司法體制的框架上確定指導(dǎo)性案例顯得特別重要。 在辦理一起運(yùn)輸毒品海洛因18克的抗訴案件過程中,一審法院以被告人吸食毒品為由,適用了最高人民法院在中高級(jí)法官培訓(xùn)班上的會(huì)議精神,認(rèn)定吸毒人員運(yùn)輸18克毒品海洛應(yīng)屬于自己吸食范疇,以非法持有毒品罪進(jìn)行了定罪處罰,并且該精神與相關(guān)的會(huì)議紀(jì)要在某些方面有一定的相似甚至是突破,部分地區(qū)也據(jù)此在召開“院長、檢察長、公安局長”三長聯(lián)席會(huì)議時(shí)進(jìn)行了相應(yīng)的規(guī)定。而在同一地區(qū),另外一個(gè)基層法院在判決一起相同案情的案件時(shí)卻是適用了運(yùn)輸毒品的條款。同樣的案情,但是在同一地區(qū)都存在這樣懸殊的判決差異和不同認(rèn)識(shí),歸根結(jié)底還是要回到法律適用和刑法的淵源問題上來,如何規(guī)范刑事司法解釋的適用,如何使之系統(tǒng)化、規(guī)范化就是擺在當(dāng)前的問題。對(duì)該問題的研究也是想通過自己所辦理的毒品案件說起,如何使我國的刑事司法解釋適用更加規(guī)范,另外也應(yīng)當(dāng)借鑒判例法的相關(guān)做法,進(jìn)一步完善、規(guī)范我國的刑事立法體系和規(guī)范刑事審判工作,避免在審判實(shí)踐中的認(rèn)識(shí)差異、量刑差異局面。筆者認(rèn)為將指導(dǎo)性案例的效力定位于司法解釋,同時(shí)與現(xiàn)有的刑事司法解釋分工、區(qū)別,對(duì)案例指導(dǎo)制度的落實(shí)很有裨益。另外,雖然案例指導(dǎo)制度有明顯的進(jìn)步,但是作為一項(xiàng)可能深刻影響刑事法律規(guī)范適用的制度,尤其是尚在初期運(yùn)行的制度,仍然需要在案例的選擇標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、案例的創(chuàng)制主體、案例的上報(bào)與評(píng)審、公開與廢止、公開格式等方面予以明確、詳細(xì)的規(guī)制。案例指導(dǎo)制度要重視從根本上提升司法自治能力和司法的開放過程,推動(dòng)我國司法進(jìn)程朝著社會(huì)正義的目標(biāo)不斷接近。
[Abstract]:Case guidance system is also accompanied by the phenomenon of disunity of criminal law gradually paid attention to by the legal profession, "concurrent adjudication" is its most popular expression. Raise the case to a clear system, play a guiding role in the application of unified criminal law. It is particularly important to identify guiding cases within the framework of the present system and the current judicial system. In the course of handling a protest case involving 18 grams of heroin and drug transport, the court of first instance applied the spirit of the meeting of the Supreme people's Court at the training course for middle and senior judges on the grounds that the accused took drugs. Determining that the transportation of 18 grams of drugs by drug addicts should fall within the scope of their own consumption, that they have been convicted and punished for the crime of illegal possession of drugs, and that this spirit is similar to, or even breakthrough in, some aspects of the relevant minutes of the meeting. According to this, some regions have made corresponding regulations when holding the joint meeting of "Premier, Procurator General and Public Security Director". In the same district, another grassroots court applied the drug transport clause in a case of the same case. The same case, but in the same region, there are such wide differences in judgment and different understandings. In the final analysis, it is still necessary to return to the issue of the application of the law and the origin of the criminal law, how to standardize the application of the criminal judicial interpretation, and how to systematize it. Standardization is the problem at hand. The research on this issue is also intended to start with the drug cases handled by ourselves, how to make the criminal judicial interpretation of our country more standardized, in addition, we should learn from the relevant practice of case law, and further improve it. Standardizing the criminal legislation system and standardizing the criminal trial work in our country, avoiding the understanding difference in the trial practice, sentencing difference situation. The author thinks that the effectiveness of guiding cases should be fixed on judicial interpretation, and at the same time, the division of labor and distinction between the existing criminal judicial interpretation and the guidance system will be very beneficial to the implementation of the case guidance system. In addition, although the case guidance system has made significant progress, as a system that may have a profound impact on the application of criminal law norms, especially the system that is still in operation at the initial stage, it still needs to be based on the selection criteria of cases and the subject of case creation. Report and review of cases, public and annulment, public format and other aspects of clear, detailed regulation. The case guidance system should attach importance to the fundamental promotion of judicial autonomy and the open process of the judiciary, and push the judicial process towards the goal of social justice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D924.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 蔣惠嶺;建立案例指導(dǎo)制度的幾個(gè)具體問題[J];法律適用;2004年05期

2 郭紅敏;;我國司法解釋權(quán)擴(kuò)大化成因分析[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年34期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 胡君;原則裁判論[D];西南政法大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號(hào)：1809425