本文選題：毒品犯罪 + 定罪量刑��； 參考：《湘潭大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：毒品數(shù)量對毒品犯罪的定罪和量刑有著非常重要的作用,在毒品種類與含量一致的情況下其數(shù)量越多帶來的社會危害性就越大。從我國當(dāng)前毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定的現(xiàn)狀來看,對毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定的規(guī)定主要集中在會議紀(jì)要中,《中華人民共和國刑法》(下稱《刑法》)與司法解釋對此少有規(guī)定;而從本文研究的裁判文書的情況來看,在具體案件中毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定所涉的情形復(fù)雜。從毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定的現(xiàn)狀不難發(fā)現(xiàn)當(dāng)前我國毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定中存在諸多問題。首先,毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定的依據(jù)并不完善,部分依據(jù)制定滯后且過于簡單,對一些爭議較大的問題尚未做出規(guī)定。其次,未確定同質(zhì)化的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),即不以含量來折算毒品數(shù)量,這是一種便于司法操作的做法,但往往會造成毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定不準(zhǔn),并影響定罪量刑。再次,毒品數(shù)量的具體認(rèn)定方法存在問題,如特情介入下查獲的毒品數(shù)量不加區(qū)分均認(rèn)定為毒品犯罪的數(shù)量,未查獲實物時毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定不準(zhǔn),販賣毒品案件中既遂標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不明導(dǎo)致毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定不準(zhǔn)確。上述問題的存在使得我國當(dāng)前毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定不規(guī)范、存在大量同案不同判的情況。本文認(rèn)為可以通過以下方式來解決這些問題。第一,完善毒品數(shù)量的認(rèn)定依據(jù),要增強立法的預(yù)見性和前瞻性,形成一套具體、全面的毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定依據(jù)。第二,采用同質(zhì)化的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),逐步實現(xiàn)毒品數(shù)量以含量折算,這要求我們在技術(shù)和經(jīng)濟條件具備的情況下實現(xiàn)全面的毒品含量鑒定。第三,完善毒品數(shù)量認(rèn)定的具體方法。在特情介入案件中應(yīng)當(dāng)區(qū)分不同的情形分別認(rèn)定毒品的數(shù)量。在新《刑事訴訟法》第151條禁止“犯意引誘”型特情介入,肯定“機會提供”型特情介入的背景下,我們應(yīng)當(dāng)將“機會提供”型特情介入下查獲的毒品數(shù)量計入毒品犯罪的數(shù)量,而“犯意引誘”型特情介入下查獲的毒品數(shù)量則不應(yīng)計入毒品犯罪數(shù)量。對未查獲實物的毒品進行數(shù)量認(rèn)定時應(yīng)進一步規(guī)范化,不僅應(yīng)當(dāng)規(guī)范證據(jù)的認(rèn)定和運用、建立健全毒品數(shù)據(jù)庫,還應(yīng)當(dāng)在判決文書中標(biāo)注出所能證明的未查獲實物的毒品重量。除此之外,也應(yīng)當(dāng)明確販賣毒品罪的既遂標(biāo)準(zhǔn)并將其準(zhǔn)確運用于毒品數(shù)量的認(rèn)定中。
[Abstract]:The quantity of drugs plays a very important role in the conviction and sentencing of drug crimes. From the current situation of drug quantity identification in our country, the provisions of drug quantity identification are mainly concentrated in the minutes of the meeting, but the Criminal Law of the people's Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Law) and the judicial interpretation have few provisions on this; However, judging from the judicial documents studied in this paper, the cases involved in the determination of drug quantity in specific cases are complicated. From the current situation of drug quantity identification, it is easy to find that there are many problems in the current drug quantity identification in our country. First of all, the basis of drug quantity determination is not perfect, part of the basis is lagging behind and too simple, some controversial issues have not been stipulated. Secondly, the standard of homogenization is not determined, that is, the amount of drugs is not converted by content, which is a convenient way of judicial operation, but often lead to the determination of the quantity of drugs is not accurate, and affect the conviction and sentencing. Thirdly, there are some problems in the specific identification methods of drug quantity, such as the quantity of drugs seized under special circumstances is determined as the amount of drug crime without distinction, and the quantity of drugs is not recognized correctly when the substance is not seized. In drug trafficking cases, unclear standards lead to inaccurate determination of drug quantities. The existence of these problems makes the quantity of drugs in our country is not standard, there are a large number of different judgments in the same case. This paper believes that these problems can be solved in the following ways. First, to improve the drug quantity identification basis, to enhance the predictability and foresight of legislation, to form a set of specific, comprehensive drug quantity identification basis. Secondly, we should adopt the standard of homogenization, and gradually realize the conversion of drug quantity to content, which requires us to realize the comprehensive drug content identification under the condition that the technical and economic conditions are available. Third, improve the specific methods of drug quantity identification. The quantity of drugs should be determined according to different situations. In the context of article 151 of the new Code of Criminal procedure, which prohibits "criminal intent inducement" and affirms "opportunity to provide" type of special intervention, We should count the amount of drugs seized under the "opportunity to provide" special situation intervention into the number of drug crimes, while the amount of drugs seized under the "criminal intent" intervention should not be counted as the number of drug crimes. It is necessary to further standardize the quantity of drugs that have not been seized, not only to standardize the identification and application of evidence, to establish and improve the drug database, but also to mark out the weight of unseized drugs that can be proved in the judgment document. In addition, we should define the accomplished standard of drug trafficking crime and apply it to the determination of drug quantity.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D924.3

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉冬嫻;伍玉功;賀江南;;毒品純度對毒品犯罪定罪量刑的影響研究[J];湖南警察學(xué)院學(xué)報;2016年04期

2 董瀠;葛偉科;董娟娟;;刑事判決書中的量刑說理實證考察及建議[J];行政與法;2015年08期

3 吳志攀;;“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)+”的興起與法律的滯后性[J];國家行政學(xué)院學(xué)報;2015年03期

4 陳瑞華;;論刑事法中的推定[J];法學(xué);2015年05期

5 趙擁軍;;從毒販住處等地查獲的毒品數(shù)量計入販賣數(shù)量應(yīng)允許反證推翻——兼論販賣毒品罪的既遂應(yīng)當(dāng)區(qū)別行為方式的不同進行認(rèn)定[J];法律適用;2015年04期

6 程雷;;誘惑偵查的程序控制[J];法學(xué)研究;2015年01期

7 何雷;;誘惑偵查規(guī)制路徑研究——以我國最新修改的《刑事訴訟法》第151條第一款為研究基點[J];蘇州大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2013年02期

8 陸詩忠;;對我國犯罪既遂標(biāo)準(zhǔn)理論的檢討[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2012年06期

9 萬毅;;論誘惑偵查的合法化及其底限——修正后的《刑事訴訟法》第151條釋評[J];甘肅社會科學(xué);2012年04期

10 趙微;郝冬婕;;刑事訴訟法修正后毒品犯罪案件證據(jù)制度的完善[J];遼寧大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2012年03期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 薛風(fēng)雷;毒品犯罪偵控若干問題研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

2 張洪成;毒品犯罪爭議問題研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2010年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 馮艷芬;論誘惑偵查在零包販毒案件中的適用[D];西南政法大學(xué);2014年

2 楊軍;論毒品犯罪的數(shù)量問題[D];西南財經(jīng)大學(xué);2013年

3 李燕飛;毒品犯罪誘惑偵查的規(guī)范化[D];中國政法大學(xué);2011年

4 張韶春;公安視野中販賣毒品罪若干疑難問題研究[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2006年

，

本文編號：1929971