从死刑错案反观死刑案件中的刑事辩护——以五例典型的故意杀人罪死刑错案为样本

刑事辩护的价值在于均衡控辩双方的力量,从而查明案件,避免刑事错案。死刑案件的复杂性、重大性和死刑的不可撤销性,使得刑事辩护在死刑案件中具有举足轻重的意义。死刑错案是发现目前死刑案件中刑事辩护所存在问题的重要途径,对完善死刑案件刑事辩护制度也有重要价值。死刑案件辩护制度的改进方向应由＂有辩护＂转向＂有效辩护＂,而这需要通过设立死刑案件刑辩律师专门管理制度和特殊参与机制来予以实现。     

论死刑案件指定辩护的有效性——兼谈构建死刑案件指定辩护质量标准

死刑刑罚具有不可逆转性,死刑案件指定辩护的有效性是法治从形式正义走向实质正义的必然要求。然而指定辩护中有效辩护的保障机制及无效辩护的现实之巨大反差,使得完善我国死刑案件指定辩护制度成为亟待解决的问题。实现死刑案件指定辩护的有效性需要实行死刑案件指定辩护律师资格认定制、设置辩护质量的底线标准、设置程序后果。     

死刑案件辩护有效性研究:状况、困境与出路

对死刑案件相关辩护情况进行调查研究可知,我国对于刑事辩护投入不充分,资源分配不均衡;辩护程序依附于定罪、量刑合一的审判传统;公权力机关内凝型关系挤压死刑辩护的空间;民意与舆论压力也妨碍死刑案件辩护的有效性。在党的十九大报告明确社会主要矛盾已经转化,要深化司法体制综合配套改革,同时最高人民法院和司法部试点刑事案件审判阶段的律师辩护全覆盖的改革语境下,职能部门应调整死刑案件法律援助费用及其来源,适时提高死刑案件辩护律师的资质要求,充分保障死刑案件中辩护律师的执业权利,将死刑案件定罪和量刑阶段的辩护程序分离,完善证人、鉴定人出庭机制,在死刑案件中逐步确立无效辩护制度,营造尊重和维护死刑案件辩护权的法律文化。     

惩处

山东省淄博市淄川区对自办案件审理实行内部辩护 为进一步保障党员的合法权益，近日，该区积极探索案件审理的新方式，在自办案件审理中实行内部辩护制度。该制度对辩护人的确定、内部辩护的具体程序、辩护意见的采纳等作出了明确规定。制度实行以来，已对3起自办案件进行了内部辩护，收到了良好效果。     

“只要前进一步，都辩护提供新的空间”——山东省律协出台《死刑案件辩护指导意见》

由山东省律师协会与北京大学法学院教授陈瑞华联合调研、草拟的《山东省律师协会死刑案件辩护指导意见（试行）》（以下简称《指导意见》）,于5月28日起施行。据陈瑞华介绍,这是全国省一级律师协会出台的第一部死刑辩护指导规范,河南、贵州两省律协也将陆续出台此类指导意见。     

论死刑案件的律师有效辩护制度

死刑案件被告人获得律师有效辩护是法治由形式正义走向实质正义的必然要求，亦是死刑正确适用的重要保障机制。死刑案件律师有效辩护的重要性与缺乏有效辩护的保障机制及无效辩护的现实之巨大反差，使得完善我国死刑案件律师有效辩护制度成为亟待解决的问题。实现死刑案件律师有效辩护需要推进死刑案件独立量刑程序的规范化，明确死刑无效辩护的标准，实行死刑辩护律师资格的认定制，确立死刑无效辩护的惩戒及司法救济机制。     

加强死刑辩护技能培训 减少和限制死刑之适用——2004年欧盟加强中国死刑案件辩护技能培训项目综述

为了加强律师的死刑辩护技能，武汉大学律师进修学院参加了中欧七家单位合作的欧盟大型项目--“加强中国死刑案件辩护技能培训”。2004年11月，武汉大学律师进修学院封30余位律师组织了为期7天的培训。培训中，包括英美刑辩专家在内的高水平培训者队伍就国际人权标准、我国死刑政策、我国死刑立法、我国死刑司法与死刑案件辩护、获得死刑案件辩护的途径、律师在死刑辩护中的职业道德、死刑案件的一般辩护技能、六类特殊死刑案件的辩护技能等问题与参训律师进行了充分的探讨，取得了良好的培训效果。     

书讯

《辩护如是:刑事辩护证据运用与法庭技巧》作者:杨金钟定价:48元出版:2013年7月本书共汇集1 6个精彩的刑事辩护案例。每个案例都从案情介绍、辩护过程和案件的证据构成——展开,全方位地展现我国当代刑事辩护的现状。同时,本书还展现律师在刑事辩护中对案件的整体把握、辩护     

辩护八忌（上）

之所以要讲辩护八忌而不讲辩护成功的秘诀，是因为一次成功的辩护从来都没有秘诀，也没有固定的模板。我们可以学习，但无法复制，因为每起案件的情况不同。即使同样罪名的案件，也因时间、地点、情节、手段不同，其辩护角度和方向也不同。没有一个成功的辩护能适用于所有案件，但不成功的辩护却是可以避免的。每次失败辩护的原因大都相同。了解辩护的禁忌，尽管不能保证成功，但至少可以避免重复前人的错误。     

辩护人的选择——从无罪辩护与罪轻辩护谈起

在刑事案件中,辩护人无疑有着举足轻重的地位。但是就我国长久以来刑事辩护率极低的现状和几起轰动案件中辩护人的辩护情况来看,辩护人的选择对保障被告人权益至关重要,甚至影响着案件的最终结果。本文试图分析无罪辩护和罪轻辩护的辩护策略选择背后的原因,以期对刑事辩护的发展有所助益。     

《正当防卫指导意见》中的程序问题评析

《正当防卫指导意见》中关于程序问题的若干规范对于正确办理涉正当防卫案件意义重大。侦查机关在取证工作中,应当着重注意对于能够证明不法侵害行为存在证据的及时收集。公检法机关在依法公正处理涉正当防卫案件时,尤其应当认真听取辩护方意见,及时披露案件信息,回应社会关切。对属于正当防卫的案件应当及时作出不予追究决定。但对于防卫过当案件均应适用认罪认罚从宽制度的要求似乎不妥。对于陪审制的运用应扬长避短。在案件办理的不同环节均应注意释法析理,尤其应当注意在认定为正当防卫的案件中对被害人及其家属进行释法析理。在做好法治宣传教育工作中,既要教育公民自觉遵守法律,更要教育公民敢于拿起法律的武器,积极行使防卫权利。     

No Right to Classified Public Whistleblowing

Given the crucial role unauthorized disclosures can play in uncovering grave government wrongdoing, it makes sense to search for a defense of justified cases of what I call “classified public whistleblowing.” The question that concerns me is what form such a defense should take. The main claim will be a negative one, namely, that a defense of whistleblowing cannot be based on individual rights, be they legal or moral, though this is indeed the most commonly proposed defense. In closing, I will outline a more appealing alternative, namely, a justification defense.     

自我防卫与相互斗殴的刑事司法判定研究——以个案为线索的分析

如何准确认定防卫案件是长久以来司法实践中的一个疑难问题,1997年《刑法》虽对正当防卫制度作出较大修订,但并未根本改变正当防卫制度在司法实践中的适用困境,其原因在于修订着重解决了防卫行为是否过当的问题,但司法实践中的困境在于如何区分自我防卫与相互斗殴。当前司法实践中较为普遍的"起因是否有责"、"防卫是否不得已"的区分标准,虽具有极强的操作性,却过于简单与绝对,未能深入探求案情,甚至与立法精神有一定背离,使得自我防卫案件往往以相互斗殴结案,而这也与犯罪控制的诉讼模式、司法技术限制、文化上的复仇动机等因素有密切关联。     

The Cultural Defense

Because of immigration in the West, increased cultural diversity poses a variety of problems for the criminal justice system. This paper examines whether a so-called "cultural defense" ought to be allowed as a freestanding defense to a criminal charge. Such a defense would "negate or mitigate criminal responsibility where acts are committed under a reasonable good-faith belief in their propriety, based on the actor's cultural heritage or tradition." The cultural defense, as a formal defense, and the use of cultural evidence in order to buttress one of the traditional defenses, are distinguished. Three cases are discussed to illustrate the issues. The possible similarity of the cultural defense to an ignorance or mistake of law defense is then considered. The latter is accepted by such theorists as Gunther Arzt and George P. Fletcher and also apparently in German law, but it is rejected by Jerome Hall on the ground that it undermines the objectivity of the criminal law. The similarity, however, is shown not to hold. It is concluded that a freestanding cultural defense should not be allowed.     

名誉侵权中的公共利益目的抗辩——新闻报道、舆论监督等行为的特殊免责事由

《民法典》第1025条规定了针对新闻报道、舆论监督等行为的公共利益目的抗辩,首次将新闻报道、舆论监督等行为的特殊免责事由写入法律。它需要弥补此前实务中引入的公众人物理论的不足,提供确定性规则。依据宪法,名誉权与表达自由均未被赋予绝对优先的地位,公共利益目的抗辩需要平衡好两者的关系。在适用时,可通过价值填充与规则再造实现法规范的进一步具体化。前者指根据法规范的目的及内容完成价值填充,后者指限缩案件范围,区分公共利益的界定主体与确认主体,将公共利益目的抗辩融入我国侵权责任法体系中,在个案中审慎开展利益衡量。     

Duress and criminal responsibility

While the plea of duress is generally accepted as a defense against criminal prosecution, the reasons why it exonerates are subject to dispute and disagreement. Duress is not easily recognizable as either an excusing or justifying condition. Additionally, duress is generally not permitted as a defense against criminal homicide, though some American jurisdictions allow the defense in felony-murder cases. In this paper, I present an argument for how and why the presence of duress can defeat a finding of criminal responsibility. This is intended to establish the philosophical foundation for the legal acceptability of the duress defense, even though I conclude that the defense does not qualify as either an excuse or a justification. I also argue that the duress defense should be allowed in cases of homicide.     

The Role of Courtroom Workgroups in Felony Case Dispositions: An Analysis of Workgroup Familiarity and Similarity

While pleading guilty has become ubiquitous in criminal trial courts, limited research has focused on the plea process and the factors that influence guilty plea convictions. Numerous theoretical accounts of the plea process highlight the importance of the court actors and their interactions. Based on this research, the current study analyzes the impact of courtroom actor familiarity and similarity on the chosen mode of disposition and the time to disposition. The findings demonstrate that similarity among the actors and familiarity between the prosecutor and judge increase the odds of a plea disposition and reduce the days to disposition. However, familiarity of the defense attorney seems to impede on the informal plea process, such that cases are more likely to proceed to trial when the defense attorney is more familiar with the other actors.     

Depressed but not legally mentally impaired

This article examines the mental impairment (insanity) defense in the Australian state of Victoria and argues that the defense is successful only when offenders suffer from psychotic mental illnesses. This raises the question about how non-psychotic offenders are dealt with by the courts when they claim ‘mental impairment’ for serious acts of violence such as homicide, particularly when a relatively large number of perpetrators involved in homicide suffer from non-psychotic illnesses like depression. The analysis shows that depressive illnesses do not reach the threshold for mental impairment (legal insanity) such that they mitigate violent criminal behavior, although they can, arguably, diminish culpability. This article draws upon existing literature, qualitative analysis of two court cases and semi-structured interviews with four legal representatives to make its conclusions.