本文選題：刑事鑒定人 + 出庭作證��； 參考：《湖南師范大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：鑒定意見(jiàn)是很多刑事案件中的重要證據(jù)。近年,我國(guó)發(fā)生的刑事錯(cuò)案中,因鑒定原因?qū)е碌腻e(cuò)案占有很大一部分,刑事鑒定人極少出庭成為其中不可推卻的原因。2012年刑事訴訟法修改,意圖完善刑事鑒定人出庭制度,但經(jīng)筆者分析,這次修改雖然較以前的立法有所改進(jìn),但仍然沒(méi)有很好地解決鑒定人出庭率極低的問(wèn)題。文章分四個(gè)部分,第一部分,就刑事鑒定人出庭作證制度的相關(guān)概念進(jìn)行界定,分析了刑事鑒定制度的發(fā)展變革,指出刑事鑒定人出庭作證的價(jià)值和功能。第二部分,結(jié)合我國(guó)新修訂的刑事訴訟法及其《解釋》,分析了我國(guó)當(dāng)前刑事鑒定人出庭作證制度的立法現(xiàn)狀和司法現(xiàn)狀,以及刑事鑒定人出庭作證制度面臨困境的主要原因。第三部分,對(duì)兩大法系鑒定人出庭作證制度進(jìn)行比較考察后,提出了我國(guó)刑事鑒定人出庭作證制度值得借鑒之處。第四部分,結(jié)合我國(guó)國(guó)情和司法實(shí)踐,提出從刑事鑒定人出庭作證的程序規(guī)則、保障機(jī)制、責(zé)任追究機(jī)制等方面完善我國(guó)的刑事鑒定人出庭作證制度。
[Abstract]:Expert opinions are important evidence in many criminal cases. In recent years, in the cases of criminal error occurring in our country, the wrong cases caused by the reasons of identification account for a large part, and rarely appearing in court of criminal connoisseurs becomes the inescapable reason. In 2012, the Criminal procedure Law was amended with the intention of perfecting the system of criminal appraisers appearing in court. However, through the author's analysis, although this amendment has some improvement over the previous legislation, it still does not solve the problem of the extremely low attendance rate of experts. The article is divided into four parts. In the first part, the author defines the relevant concepts of the system of criminal appraiser appearing in court, analyzes the development and transformation of the system of criminal identification, and points out the value and function of the criminal expert in court. The second part, combined with the newly revised Criminal procedure Law and its explanation, analyzes the current legislative and judicial status of the present system of criminal appraiser appearing in court in our country, and the main reasons why the system of criminal connoisseur appearing in court is facing difficulties. The third part, after the comparative investigation of the two legal system, the author points out that the system of criminal connoisseur testifying in court in our country should be used for reference. The fourth part, combined with our country's national conditions and judicial practice, puts forward the perfection of our country's criminal connoisseur testifying system in the aspects of procedure rule, safeguard mechanism, responsibility investigation mechanism and so on.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南師范大學(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4條

1 顧永忠;;我國(guó)刑事辯護(hù)制度的改革與再完善[J];人民檢察;2008年01期

2 鄒積超;;淺論鑒定人的法庭位置[J];中國(guó)司法鑒定;2010年01期

3 張玉鑲;對(duì)司法鑒定學(xué)幾個(gè)概念的再思考[J];中外法學(xué);1997年03期

4 陳瑞華;;增列權(quán)利還是加強(qiáng)救濟(jì)?——簡(jiǎn)論刑事審判前程序中的辯護(hù)問(wèn)題[J];環(huán)球法律評(píng)論;2006年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：1932867