共犯最小从属性说之再提倡——兼论帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪的性质

限制从属性说以正犯行为同时具有构成要件该当性与违法性作为共犯的成立前提,因而面临无法有效应对新型网络共同犯罪的危机。为解决这一危机,该说中有着眼于帮助对象必须是他人的"犯罪",主张帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪只是"帮助犯的量刑规则"的,也有以刑法分则条文的定罪机能为根据,提出"帮助犯正犯化"说的。但是,共犯的违法性不从属于正犯,正犯合法之时共犯亦可能违法,正犯违法之时共犯亦可能合法,因而应采取最小从属性说。在该说看来,帮助信息网络犯罪活动罪在属于独立罪名这一意义上,具有正犯性,而在只有为他人"犯罪"提供帮助才能成立犯罪这一意义上,又具有共犯性,因而是一种介于正犯与共犯之间的"混合归责模式"。这种理解虽然看似违反形式逻辑,但其恰恰是对刑法第287条之二的忠实解读,且完全符合司法解释主张原则上应从属于正犯犯罪,但在严格限制的前提下可以仅从属于正犯实行行为的态度。     

Same Crime,Different Time: Why we Need an Amended Guideline for Repeat Offenders to Minors

Currently there is a circuit split between the Second and Ninth Circuits in determining whether or not to apply previous juvenile sex offenses to the sentencing of an adult sex offender. The Second Circuit feels it is within the trial court's discretion to apply an enhancement of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines by applying either a juvenile adjudicated or unadjudicated sex offense to the sentencing of an adult offender. The Ninth Circuit sees that as improper and only adult sex offenses should be counted toward the sentencing of adult sex offenses. Due to the vague language of this enhancement, the determination of how to apply this is up to the court's discretion. This Note proposes that the U.S. Sentencing Commission amend section 4B1.5, and decide in favor of the Ninth Circuit due to the plain text reading of the statute, as well as the intent of the guideline itself alongside the “rule of lenity” as understood in the Ninth Circuit's reasoning of only applying adult offenses to the sentencing of that adult later on in life. The positive public policy of rehabilitation of juvenile offenders would be served greatly by this amendment to this guideline. By eliminating the possibility of having such an offense count against a juvenile in the future would allow and encourage those juveniles to take positive steps toward their future.     

上下游犯罪“量刑倒挂”困境与“法益恢复”方案——从认罪认罚从宽制度的视角展开

无论是从法哲学视域的公正视角还是司法实践的立场,基于同一笔犯罪事实的前提,“下游犯罪量刑不高于上游犯罪”原则已被普遍承认。然而,由于上游犯罪来源的多样性与下游犯罪的相对单一性特点,司法裁判中上下游犯罪“量刑倒挂”现象时有发生。为了应对这一不合理现象,近年来司法机关在认罪认罚从宽制度的“背书”下,着力探索了一系列方法,主要包括:将自首、坦白情节“可以减轻处罚”的实质条件模糊化并人为主导“减轻处罚”结果,技术化地创设“下游犯罪量刑轻于上游犯罪的主犯但重于从犯”规则,对下游犯罪大量适用非监禁刑。然而,上述方案与认罪认罚从宽制度并无实质关联。事实上,在认罪认罚从宽制度背景下,下游犯罪行为人退赃退赔的“赎罪”抑或“法益恢复”行为可以作为量刑实质从宽的理论根据。具体而言,下游犯罪行为人在上游犯罪案发前的“法益恢复”情形,可以考虑对其“相对不起诉”,在上游犯罪案发后的“法益恢复”情形,可以考虑对其“定罪免刑”。     

未成年人犯罪量刑平衡问题研究

随着犯罪低龄化问题的日渐突出,未成年人犯罪问题日益成为国际社会和世界各国所关注的问题。为贯彻对未成年犯教育、挽救、改造的方针,达到预防未成年人再次犯罪,以保护未成年人健康成长和保护社会的双重目的,就应当把握对未成年犯罪从宽处罚的原则,注重量刑的平衡问题。由于我国没有单独的未成年刑法,对未成年犯如何适用刑罚,对未成年人犯罪的量刑如何适用无疑是一个需要探索的问题。     

从调研中看社区矫正

社区矫正作为一种经济、有效、人道的刑罚执行方法,代表着刑罚执行的未来走向。但我国的社区矫正工作起步较晚,总体发展水平比较低,尤其是缺乏一个成熟完善的社区矫正法律体系。本文依托对虹口区社区矫正实施情况的调查报告,根据社区矫正的理论,对社区矫正中存在的一些现实问题进行了分析,并且提出了对社区矫正制度的改革建议。     

量刑程序改革的实体法支撑

在刑法理论上必须对量刑基准、量刑情节等问题进行研究,才能为量刑程序的改革提供实体上的支持,从而在量刑环节确立争论点,增强控辩对抗,为法官准确量刑提供素材。没有实体法上的支撑,围绕量刑程序的所有美好设计都可能落空。目前流行的关于量刑基准的各种实务理解均存在诸多不足;寻找量刑基准的方法应当是实证分析法;量刑基准的确立,需要检察官、法官、学者的通力合作。量刑情节具有两面性,对量刑情节的判断可能受非理性因素的影响。在多个逆向情节并存的情况下,立足于抵消说的"综合判断说"基本上是合理的。     

论受贿罪选择客体及其对定罪量刑的影响

受贿罪是实践中案发率非常高的腐败犯罪,作为刑法学界研究较为深入的一个犯罪,其概念、构成要件、与它罪的区别、证据的判断、运用等问题的探讨已经有一个大致的眉目。然而,站在另一个平台和视角,学界对于受贿罪选择客体的研究却甚少。本文从一个细微的切入点探究了受贿罪选择客体及其对定罪量刑的影响。     

中德(日)量刑基准之比较研究

在德日刑法中,受责任主义的规制,责任为刑罚规定了前提和界限,基于预防方面的考量不能僭越责任程度所决定的刑罚。相比之下,中国现行刑法的量刑基准理论与之虽貌合实神离,因为作为其量刑基准的刑事责任的大小是社会危害性与人身危险性评价的加权之值。我国现行量刑基准理论实际上是现行刑事责任理论体系的逻辑延伸。欲求我国量刑基准理论在逻辑上更为科学合理,在价值取向上彰显现代刑法之人权保障机能,则必以改善现行刑事责任理论体系为前提。改造的重点在于纠正将责任评价与刑罚量定混为一体的做法,将之予以分离,使之各得其所。作为犯罪后果负担的刑事责任只能由犯罪的严重性程度来决定,人身危险性因素不能用于评价犯罪与刑事责任,而只能在刑罚最后量定时做有利于犯罪人更新改造之缓和考量。     

Revenge,Retribution, and Values: Social Attitudes and Punitive Sentencing

This study examined the pattern of relations between vengeance attitudes, right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), and social dominance orientation (SDO) using the structure of value types proposed by Schwartz (Adv Exp Soc Psychol 25:1–65, 1992). Relations between these variables and support for a variety of sentencing options, including capital punishment, were then investigated. One hundred and forty-eight students in Adelaide, South Australia, completed a Vengeance Scale (Stuckless and Goranson, J Soc Behav Pers 7:25–42, 1992), measures of RWA and SDO, the Schwartz Value Survey (1992), and a Sentencing Goals Scale. As predicted, vengeance attitudes and SDO were found to be positively related to the importance of power values and negatively related to the importance of universalism and benevolence values. Vengeance attitudes were negatively related to rehabilitation and positively related to support for retribution and incapacitation sentencing goals, while RWA was positively related to the endorsement of deterrence and incapacitation as sentencing goals. Regression analyses indicated that only RWA and vengeance attitudes were unique predictors of death penalty support. Results provide support for the suggestion that vengeance is closely associated with our notion of retributive justice.