法官的实践性知识与智慧导向

法官智慧是现代知识司法的一种象征。智慧的法官必须用法律的智能和审判技术使得司法审判的程序设置和实体性规定更有实效。智慧的法官能够为社会提供人与人、人与社会、人与物的和谐共处。智慧的法官本身就是现代司法的一种象征。法官是智慧的知识的天然结合。良好的司法制度应该是美德和智慧的结果。一个优秀的法官必须掌握充分的法律知识以及在此基础上的司法经验。法官智慧以法律知识为基础,并且是对法律知识的升华。法官的智慧以司法审判的经验为补充。法官智慧的获得与其主体及其主观能动性有关。法官的智慧体现的是法官的敏锐观察力与良好的尺度感,能较快地判断出,在特定的场合下,什么样的裁判是最恰当的。法官智慧的综合性体现在法官的司法审判中。     

量刑信息系统建构的域外经验与中国方案

量刑信息系统收集和整理大量的既往判例以供法官搜索与待裁量案件最相似的生效判例，并通过查看这些生效判例量刑因素的类型与范围、量刑因素对量刑的影响情况、量刑结论分布状况、对应判例的具体案情等信息，最终在综合法官量刑经验的基础上，作出最适合待裁量案件的量刑结论。这种参考既往量刑信息为待裁量案件提供指引的系统，较早在加拿大、澳大利亚、英国、荷兰、日本、爱尔兰、以色列等国的相关司法领域运行，并均对量刑平衡的实现颇有助益；中国司法实践采纳成文量刑指南为基础的量刑模式已有十余年，理论与实务对此褒贬不一，类案检索制度与智慧法院建设的落地，为量刑信息系统的构建提供了规范依据与技术支撑。通过建立以量刑指南为本、量刑信息系统为辅的二维体系，可以充分化解限制法官自由裁量权等弊病，同时还具有保障指南合理适用率、为法官提供借鉴量刑经验之便捷渠道、为量刑指南主管部门提供实践量刑信息三大功能。在量刑信息系统构建初期，宜将量刑评议表与生效裁判文书作为信息的基本内容；而在延展效能上，应通过量刑信息系统建立起量刑与监狱资源动态平衡的良性互动关系。     

我国量刑建议的缺陷与重构

量刑建议本来旨在削弱法官自由裁量权,减少法官司法暴政,改变同案不同判,强化司法公正与权威的的司法的活动。但是在司法实践中却催生出强势的检察官,懒惰的法官,强势的检察官好像获得了法官同等的量刑权力,而懒惰法官只是在检察官的量刑建议中做一个选择,量刑建议的实践呈现出各自为政的状态,如何规范、统一量刑建议制度已成为一个迫在眉睫问题。     

罪刑均衡原则在刑事审判中的体现──基于适用缓刑降格量刑裁量现象的实证分析

刑事法官运用已有的审判经验,充分发挥量刑自由裁量权是审判权的应有之意。“一个法官绝对不可以改变法律编织物的编织材料,但是他可以,也应该把皱折熨平”。①“规范的构建应当给法官留下追求正义价值的空间……,司法审判必须以事先存在的一般规范命题为前提,”但是“将一般规范运用于具体案件事实的过程不应是一个机械的、工具性的过程,而应当建立在法官对法的公平和正义价值的深刻实际的理解基础之上”。②“法官过度地以自己的刑罚价值观影响量刑,”其结果会导致不同程度的“量刑不当、司法不公甚至司法擅断、量刑畸轻畸重”③,因而,对…     

试论量刑建议权

目前,法官在量刑过程中面临着这样一种困境,一方面,刑法规定的刑罚幅度比较大;另一方面,各类案件的复杂性日益加深。这就造成了法官在量刑时量刑失当现象时有发生,法官自由裁量权反而限定了法官正确量刑的发挥。因此,量刑建议作为一种监督法官自由裁量权的有效手段正得以越来越多在司法实务中运用,理论界也进行着积极的探索。本文尝试从量刑建议权的涵义、价值及我国司法操作构想来具体分析,作出有益的探索。     

对量刑建议权的思考

目前，法官在量刑过程中面临着这样一种困境，一方面，刑法规定的刑罚幅度比较大，另一方面，各类案件的复杂性日益加深。这就造成了法官在量刑时量刑失当现象时有发生，法官自由裁量权反而限定了法官正确量刑的发挥。因此，量刑建议作为一种监督法官自由裁量权的有效手段正得以越来越多在司法实务中运用，理论界也进行着积极的探索，本文尝试从量刑建议权的含义、价值及我国司法操作构想来具体分析，做出有益的探索。     

法律解释视角下的“电脑量刑”

电脑量刑之类的思想很早就有了,限制法官的法律解释活动和视司法为机械的操作活动的思想曾经在西方历史上很盛行,但这种思想最终被证明违反了法律解释原理。根据法律解释原理,司法活动是法官对法律的理解、解释和应用过程,电脑量刑是对这一原理的违背。电脑量刑在我国出现具有其特定的原因,推行下去会对司法活动产生不良的影响。除去对电脑等现代科技的迷信,我们可以利用它们为法官在司法活动中的法律解释服务。     

刑事判决书量刑说理问题实证研究——以D法院97份刑事判决书为样本

量刑说理是法官对量刑结论的正当性进行解释论证的一种诉讼活动.通过量刑说理,可以增加量刑的可接受性,有助于法官思考量刑的妥当性、认真对待被告人的权利.但是司法实务中,量刑说理问题并未引起足够的重视,判决书中量刑说理不够全面、透彻,缺乏说服力,以致引发被告人和社会各界对量刑结论的质疑,影响了司法权威.造成这一问题的原因是多方面的,在司法实践中应丰富说理内容、强化说理个性并完善配套措施,以提高判决书量刑说理的质量.     

量刑自由裁量权的边界:集体经验、个体决策与偏差识别

在量刑规范化改革中,如何在赋予法官自由裁量权的前提下,将"案件由谁审理"这一因素所导致的量刑偏差控制在合理限度内,是理论和实务要解决的问题.一种可行的方案是,将法官个体的刑罚裁量与法官量刑集体经验进行对比,对靠近集体经验量刑的法官的自由裁量权采取肯定和尊重的态度,而对量刑显著偏离集体经验的法官的量刑决策进行识别并纠正其偏差.基于北京地区五类案件近5万份刑事判决书,对盗窃、诈骗、抢劫、故意伤害和交通肇事案件的刑罚裁量展开实证研究后发现:"案件由谁审理"这一变量能够解释5％11％的量刑差异;大多数法官的量刑结果在集体经验附近浮动,只有少部分法官的量刑结果显著偏离集体经验;更有少部分法官在多个罪名的刑罚裁量中均出现量刑偏差.量刑结果显著偏离集体经验的法官应成为自由裁量权规制中重点关注的对象,尤其是在多个罪名的刑罚裁量中均出现偏差的法官.量刑自由裁量权的规制方案,彰显了大数据与算法在量刑规范化改革中的应用前景,在引入"算法的程序控制"理念的前提下,具有推广价值.     

智能量刑算法的司法适用:逻辑、难题与程序法回应

智能量刑算法的司法适用,既推动了我国传统司法的结构性转向,又开拓了"同案同判"的技术化裁判路径.这主要归功于智能量刑算法的主体性逻辑、量化规范逻辑以及经验规范逻辑.但结合当前的司法实践与社会反馈却发现,暗箱裁判、算法歧视并非当前智能量刑算法司法适用的最大难题,反而是公众的可接受性、经验归纳的周延性以及"系统性偏差"等难题极大地困扰着算法裁判的实践效果.为了更好地推动智能量刑算法的司法适用,我国应在现行司法程序的基础上,建立司法听证程序、算法选择程序、算法判决申诉程序,并面向三类刑事变通事项建立主审法官的伴随性审查程序,以消除智能量刑算法的技术性缺陷.     

量刑比例初探——以江苏省姜堰市人民法院《规范量刑指导意见》为视角

引入量刑比例原则是尝试用数学的方法解决刑罚裁量的难题,探求刑事司法的正义,还给多数人公平。司法实践中,因为量刑幅度的存在,加之法官个体素质的差异,致使同罪异罚、量刑不当的现象大量存在。因此,制定一个统一的量刑规范,特别是设定具体的量刑基准和确立针对不同的量刑因素出现时如何换算的量刑比例就成为司法实践中的当务之急。     

DOES IMPRISONMENT ALTER THE LIFE COURSE? EVIDENCE ON CRIME AND EMPLOYMENT FROM A NATURAL EXPERIMENT

Ex‐prisoners consistently manifest high rates of criminal recidivism and unemployment. Existing explanations for these poor outcomes emphasize the stigmatizing effects of imprisonment on prisoners seeking postrelease employment as well as the deleterious effects of imprisonment on prisoners’ attitudes and capabilities. However, these explanations must be distinguished from selection effects in the criminal sentencing process, which also could explain some or all of these poor outcomes. To distinguish between criminogenic and selection explanations for ex‐prisoners’ postrelease experience, I analyze data from a natural experiment in which criminal cases were assigned randomly to judges with sizable sentencing disparities. Using these exogenous sentencing disparities, I produce unbiased estimates of the causal effects of imprisonment on the life course. The results of this analysis suggest that selection effects could be sufficiently large to account for prisoners’ poor postrelease outcomes because judges with large sentencing disparities in their use of imprisonment had similarly high caseload unemployment and criminal recidivism rates.     

Judges’ sentencing decisions with older offenders

Older offenders tend to be treated with more leniency in the criminal justice system. A number of studies show that older offenders are less likely to be incarcerated, and when they are incarcerated, are more likely to receive shorter sentences. However, to date, no research has directly examined why such leniency occurs. This study asked U.S. state trial court judges to reflect on their sentencing practices with older offenders and to rate the factors considered most important when sentencing this population. Responses were received from 212 judges. Only 31% of judges acknowledged treating older offenders with greater leniency. These judges also indicated that they predominantly rely on legal factors when making decisions about sentencing with older offenders rather than factors specifically associated with age. Only cognitive impairment was identified by judges as one of the five most important factors to consider when sentencing older offenders. These results are discussed in terms of judges’ awareness of how they weigh information to make legal decisions. The influence of judges’ age and attitudes about aging on sentencing decisions are also explored.     

论量刑证据独立性的基础

受同态复仇的量刑模式影响，法定化量刑在相当长历史时期内存在。其导致刑事审判基本多集中于如何定罪，形成了服务于定罪，以定罪证明为中心的传统刑事证据法。量刑的精细化和传播的大众化，使得量刑公正和量刑均衡的重要性逐渐凸显．从而为量刑证据从幕后走向台前提供历史机遇。量刑的目标追求和指导原则是量刑事实特殊性的基础．量刑事实构成的...     

Too Many Black Men: The Sentencing Judge's Dilemma

Legal reform sometimes has unanticipated, even ironic, results. A good example is federal legislation adopted in the 1980s that was supposed to enhance equity in sentencing. Congress, like many state legislatures in this period, reduced judicial control over sentencing by adopting presumptive sentencing guidelines for all serious criminal offenses and mandatory sentences for some specific crimes. Reformers did succeed in reducing judicial discretion in the sentencing process, but racial disparities have gotten much worse. Unprecedented numbers of minorities, particularly black men, are going to jail for long terms. The situation leaves trial judges in a difficult position. They are legally bound to implement a sentencing regime that many of them believe is racially discriminatory. Herbert Jacob's work on criminal trial courts provides a framework for investigating this problem. As Jacob's organizational approach predicts, judges were initially more troubled by the diminution of their powers than by the emerging pattern of increased minority incarceration. Nevertheless, some judges have criticized the racial implications of the sentencing law, protesting in various, resourceful ways. Judicial resistance to a law on moral grounds, though rare, is significant because it represents a break in the ranks of officialdom that enhances the moral credibility of critics of the current law.     

美国量刑理论中的关注焦点理论

关注焦点理论是美国刑事司法领域解释量刑差异的主流理论。该理论认为,法官和其他刑事司法系统的决策者在作出量刑决定时有三个关注焦点:罪犯的可谴责性、人身危险性,以及实践中的可操作性。由于法官在量刑时缺乏完整的信息,因此使用"感官速记"把对这三个焦点的关注转化为对性别、年龄、种族等表面信息的关注,导致"类案不同判"。对关注焦点的研究,在理论上有助于理解司法过程中量刑差异的产生原因,在实践中有助于解决量刑不规范的问题。通过介绍美国的关注焦点理论,以及这个理论框架下的实证研究和对关注焦点理论的评论,反思对我国量刑理论和实践的借鉴意义。     

The dynamics of unemployment and imprisonment in England and Wales, 1946–1985

This paper explores the dynamic relationship between unemployment and prison admissions in the English criminal justice system. First, by adopting econometric procedures designed to test between alternative forms of dynamic equilibria, it finds that there has been a steady-state growth rate in prison admissions and that unemployment growth has played an important role in determining that equilibrium. Second, by developing a behavioral model of judicial expectations, it argues that judges have used their expectations as heuristic devices for simplifying sentencing decisions and that the unanticipated changes in unemployment have played a key role in determining changes in sentencing patterns. Due to individualized sentencing practices characteristic of English judges, unemployment plays a much larger role in determining prison sentences than warranted under Anglo-American legal traditions.     

Judicial Narratives of Ideal and Deviant Victims in Judges’ Capital Sentencing Decisions

Although the Victim’s Rights Movement has led to advances for victims of crime, the use of victim impact evidence in criminal trials remains controversial due to the suspicion that such evidence enhances punitive attitudes and arbitrariness in capital sentencing outcomes. Despite a growing body of literature in this area, it remains unclear if some victims are viewed more favorably than others, particularly from the perspective of judges. The current study examines the construction of victims by judges in capital cases and how this portrayal impacts sentencing outcomes in Delaware, which vests the final capital sentencing authority in judges rather than juries. In examining this gap in the literature, we consider if judges make distinctions between ideal and deviant victims, if these distinctions are associated with victim and offender characteristics, and if the construction of victims impacts offender sentencing. Findings from this study lend support to the idea that judges describe some victims as more “worthy” than others, that victims described in ideal ways are more likely to be white and female, and that “ideal victims” are more likely to result in death sentences.     

Assessing the influence of the Columbine shooting on federal sentencing outcomes

School shootings are not a new phenomenon in the United States or internationally. In comparison to other acts of violence experienced by youth, such tragedies are uncommon but garner extensive media attention. The Columbine High School shooting received more attention across a broader range of issues than any other school shooting, with only the Sandy Hook tragedy rivaling it for media attention. In the aftermath of the Columbine shooting, public sentiment regarding violence in schools became a central point of contention that bred fear and panic. Given the embeddedness of judges within the larger community context and the effects of community characteristics on sentencing outcomes, we wondered if the Columbine shooting – via moral panic and community upheaval – might have had an impact on judges imposing criminal sentences. To assess the effect of the Columbine shooting on judicial decision-making outcomes, the current study uses United States Sentencing Commission data from 1998 through 2001. In doing so, it contributes to the extant literature concerning the embeddedness of judges within communities and answers recent call for more research on the temporal context of sentencing disparities.     

重考量刑公正与量刑差异——德阳市五个基层法院的定量研究证据

主流观点认为中国普遍存在量刑差异,但该结论实证依据不足。本文借助于德阳市5个法院的1039个样本,检测盗窃、抢劫、故意伤害罪的量刑情况。研究按四组配对比较后发现,三组法院量刑均衡。盗抢罪量刑受数额、前科、审理程序、自白、律师参与、从严处罚等影响,故意伤害罪因伤害程度、受害人个数、赔偿等有别。2010年量刑意见有助于规范量刑,但法官更倾向于从严处罚。中国未来的量刑改革,还需具体规定如何适用从宽从严集合情节。