【摘要】：對(duì)無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量的程序改革提供實(shí)體上的支持,就必須對(duì)最高人民法院所制定的《量刑指導(dǎo)意見》及各地高級(jí)人民法院所制定的《實(shí)施細(xì)則》中關(guān)于無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量存在的問題進(jìn)行研究,從而找出法官在進(jìn)行無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量時(shí)不適用“量刑指導(dǎo)意見”的原因。目前在司法實(shí)踐中,導(dǎo)致法官進(jìn)行無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量時(shí),不適用“量刑指導(dǎo)意見”的主要原因有三個(gè)：一是“量刑指導(dǎo)意見”并不能避免無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量失衡；二是“量刑指導(dǎo)意見”對(duì)無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量中“因素”范圍劃定狹��；三是“量刑指導(dǎo)意見”不能指引法官在無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量中正確行使自由裁量權(quán)。因此,要規(guī)范無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量,就必須從以下兩個(gè)方面著手解決：一是要確立科學(xué)的無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量的規(guī)范。這就要求規(guī)范無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量不僅要符合《刑法》的要求,同時(shí)還要辯證看待“量刑指導(dǎo)意見”所使用的量刑方法與其他量刑方法對(duì)無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量所起到的作用。二是要在制度上督促法官正確對(duì)無量刑情節(jié)犯罪進(jìn)行刑罰裁量。這就要求法官對(duì)無量刑情節(jié)犯罪的刑罰裁量作出合理化說明；要求法官對(duì)無量刑情節(jié)犯罪作出刑罰裁量之前遵循先例判決；要求檢察官對(duì)法官已作出的無量刑情節(jié)犯罪刑罰裁量進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià)。
[Abstract]:To provide substantive support for the reform of the criminal penalty discretion procedure without sentencing circumstances, It is necessary to study the problems existing in the "sentencing guidance opinion" formulated by the Supreme people's Court and the "detailed rules for implementation" formulated by the higher people's courts in various localities concerning the discretion of criminal penalties without sentencing circumstances, Therefore, the reason why the judge does not apply the sentencing guidance in the penalty discretion of the crime without sentencing circumstances is found out. At present, in judicial practice, there are three main reasons why judges do not apply "sentencing guidance opinion" when they decide the penalty of crime without sentencing circumstances: first, "sentencing guidance opinion" can not avoid the unbalance of criminal penalty discretion without sentencing circumstances; Second, the sentencing guidance opinion delimits a narrow range of "factors" in the penalty discretion of the crime without sentencing circumstances; third, the sentencing guidance opinion cannot guide the judge to correctly exercise the discretion in the penalty discretion of the crime without sentencing circumstances. Therefore, in order to standardize the penalty discretion of crime without sentencing circumstances, we must solve it from the following two aspects: first, we should establish a scientific standard of criminal penalty discretion without circumstances of sentencing. This requires that the discretion to regulate the penalty for crimes without circumstances of sentencing should not only meet the requirements of the Criminal Law, At the same time, we should dialectically view the effect of sentencing methods and other sentencing methods on the penalty discretion of crimes without sentencing circumstances. The other is to urge the judge to judge the penalty correctly. This requires the judge to make a reasonable explanation of the penalty discretion of the crime without sentencing circumstances, and to follow the precedent judgment before the judge makes the penalty judgment on the crime without sentencing circumstances; The prosecutor is required to evaluate the judge's discretion in the penalty of a crime without sentencing circumstances.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D924.13

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 馮軍;;刑事判決合法性評(píng)價(jià)的基本范疇探討[J];東方法學(xué);2008年06期

2 吳景芳;刑罰與量刑[J];法律適用;2004年02期

3 周光權(quán);量刑規(guī)范化:可行性與難題[J];法律適用;2004年04期

4 虞平;;量刑與刑的量化——兼論“電腦量刑”[J];法學(xué)家;2007年02期

5 周光權(quán);;量刑程序改革的實(shí)體法支撐[J];法學(xué)家;2010年02期

6 陳嵐;;西方國(guó)家的量刑建議制度及其比較[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2008年01期

7 郭彤;;量刑規(guī)范化:法官量刑自由裁量權(quán)合理行使的路徑[J];法治研究;2010年06期

8 趙秉志;;深入踐行實(shí)體正義的量刑改革[J];法制資訊;2010年Z2期

9 陳興良;罪刑均衡的中國(guó)命運(yùn)[J];中央政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1996年06期

10 黎其武;;量刑概念新說[J];貴陽(yáng)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年01期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 張向東;基準(zhǔn)刑研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：2386792