清代夫权的法定与恣意——基于《大清律例》与刑科档案的考察

理学是清代统治阶级所尊奉的正统学说,夫权具有深厚的生存土壤。从《大清律例》与刑科档案考察,清代的夫权主要包括夫可自由处分家产而不受限制的财产权;夫肆意詈骂妻而不被处罚、殴妻轻罚与不罚及过失杀妻勿论的教令权;妻犯七出时的休妻权;妻背夫逃亡或者犯奸时的嫁卖权;妻殴骂夫之直系尊亲属或犯奸时,杀死该有罪之妻的选择权等。清律法定的夫权至上,导致现实生活中夫权被恣意发挥,这也是清代夫犯妻案件多发的主要原因。     

论微罪体系的构建--以醉酒驾驶型危险驾驶罪研究为切入点

近年来,我国活跃的刑事立法中呈现出法定最高刑为一年有期徒刑以下(含拘役)的微罪类型,这在我国刑罚结构明显趋重的刑法体系中显得尤为特殊。我国刑罚附随后果的严重性和广泛性,使微罪在司法适用中受到了质疑,其中最为明显的当属醉酒驾驶型危险驾驶罪。微罪的正当性建立在法益保护原则以及比例原则的基础上。在立法设计方面,微罪入刑应当严守“非实害犯”的界定,并以故意这一主观要件对刑事可罚性予以限制;同时应配置轻缓化的处遇措施,注重与行政处罚的衔接。在司法适用方面,微罪一律起诉、一律判刑的思维不可取。为实现个案公正,应当充分发挥现有刑事诉讼制度框架内的相对不起诉制度功能,并激活我国《刑法》第37条定罪免刑条款,以达到微罪的轻缓化处罚效果。     

《民法典》夫妻共同债务构成法理基础论

关于夫妻共同债务构成的法理基础,现有法律、司法解释的规定基本存在两个范畴:一个是物权法财产共同共有理论,并试图把婚姻家庭内部行为与外部行为区别开来,提出夫妻共同财产包括积极财产和消极财产(消极财产即夫妻共同债务),该理论的核心是"财产共有则债务共担".另一个是"法律行为理论",其影响夫妻共同债务构成最主要的是夫妻双方有...     

自首制度比较研究

本文对中外刑法的自首制度的几个问题,诸如立法模式、自首概念、自首成立要件与处罚等进行了详细比较研究。     

我国刑事和解实证分析

在构建和谐社会背景下,各地检察机关积极探索当事人和解刑事案件的宽缓处理方式,取得了良好的社会效果。但由于受现行法律框架、司法资源、考评机制以及传统司法观念的束缚,对当事人和解的刑事案件的处理,在适用范围、处理方式及相关配套措施等方面还存在一些问题。因此,应当建立与我国时代背景和法律文化相契合的刑事和解制度,包括填补立法上的缺失,明确其适用程序,并健全相关的配套措施等。     

Marital Rape: Is the Crime Taken Seriously Without Co-occurring Physical Abuse?

This vignette study was conducted to determine how observers' beliefs about marital rape are altered by the knowledge of a prior history of husband-to- wife physical violence. Participants (n = 50 college students) read three different marital rape situations; in one situation the husband had been physically violent in the past; in another he had not. In the third situation, participants were not given any information about the physical abuse history between the spouses. As expected, participants blamed the victim most for the marital rape and minimized the seriousness of the rape when they had been told that there was not a prior history of husband-to-wife physical abuse. These findings suggest that observers use a physical violence history to establish the coercion needed to determine that marital rape had occurred. The legal implications of these findings are discussed.     

认罪认罚从宽制度中的协议破裂与程序反转研究

认罪认罚从宽制度的一个显著特征是存在一纸认罪认罚具结书。在法律属性上,该具结书不宜简单理解为保证书或者证明材料,应当视为一种刑事协议。它有破裂的多种可能性:被追诉人的反悔、检察官的变更起诉或者法官的不予采纳。协议破裂是认罪认罚从宽制度中典型的"肥尾风险",发生概率很小但影响很大,处理不当将会引发难以估量的反噬风险。未来的制度完善,应以司法公正、司法公信力与正当预期利益的平衡为原则,构建协议破裂与程序反转的正当规则。被追诉人的反悔权应当有所限制,分为正当反悔与不正当反悔,并适用不同的反转程序;检察官应遵循禁止违反承诺原则;法官不采纳具结书应遵循"事先告知、听取意见与可撤回"的正当程序。唯此,认罪认罚从宽制度才不至于让被追诉人误读为获取有罪供述、打击犯罪的一种精巧安排,该制度才能走得更远。     

Sex/gender‐based decision‐making in the criminal justice system as a possible (additional) explanation for the underrepresentation of women in official criminal statistics — a review of international literature

This article represents an analysis of the literature on sex‐based selection processes in the criminal justice system. It is only since the feminist wave of the sixties that sexual discrimination has been considered as an issue of importance in the study of the criminal justice system and that female criminality has been looked at more thoroughly. The article deals with the different assumptions and hypotheses which have come forward in the debate on the possible discrimination of men and women in the criminal justice process. In the first part of the article the various theoretical models are outlined: the chivalry and evil women hypotheses, the legal or etiological model, the social control theory, the family‐based justice model, and a multifactoral model. In the second part of the article, the results of empirical research relevant to these hypotheses are presented. American, British, Belgian, Dutch and some German literature has been taken into account. The review of the literature shows that the chivalry hypothesis cannot offer an all‐embracing explanation for the possibly perceived preferential treatment of women. Similar conclusions can be drawn for the explanatory value of the legal model. Although a more lenient treatment of women can sometimes be explained by legal factors, these factors can offer no more than a partial explanation for observed sex differences in the criminal justice system. Especially in the case of pre‐trial release and sentencing, more particularly when deciding whether or not to send a defendant to prison, a noticeable sex‐effect can still be found. In the literature we find strong suggestions — although not always confirmed — that an (initially observed) more lenient treatment of women at these stages can be explained by stereotypes and expectations about the personality of women as less dangerous and the specific role which women fulfill in western society.     

From Loss of Services to Loss of Support: The Wrongful Death Statutes, the Origins of Modern Tort Law, and the Making of the Nineteenth-Century Family

The wrongful death statutes enacted in most states during the mid-nineteenth century have long represented a classic moment in the narrative of American legal history. Historians have not observed, however, that American wrongful death statutes amended the English act on which they were modeled to introduce a gender asymmetry peculiar to the United States. Led by New York, most American jurisdictions limited wrongful death actions to "the widow and next of kin" of the decedent, categories that did not include husbands of deceased wives. Thus, a wife could bring a wrongful death action for the death of her husband, but a husband could not bring a wrongful death action on his own behalf for the death of his wife.
The wrongful death statutes represent a heretofore unrecognized conjuncture of the beginnings of the modem law of torts with the nineteenth-century legal reconstruction of the family. The statutes mowed accident litigation away from an eighteenth-century model of masters suing for loss of the services of a servant, slave, wife, or child, toward the now more familiar model of suits for loss of wages and support. Moreover, the gender asymmetry of the statutes embodied and reproduced a new nineteenth-century conception of the family in which men worked as free laborers and women were confined to relatively narrow domestic roles, removed from the market and dependent for their support on the wages of their husbands. Indeed, the statutes anticipated by over half a century the American welfare state's two-track approach to support for wage-earning men and dependent women.     

A Perfect Prosecution: The People of the State of New York Versus Dominique Strauss-Kahn

People v. Strauss-Kahn is an ideal lens through which to examine the operation of a criminal justice system that privileges the presumption of guilt, or, to use the words of the US Supreme Court in the 2012 decisions Lafler v. Cooper and Missouri v. Frye, has become “a system of pleas, not a system of trials.” It is both an excellent example of a transparent and objective invocation of the criminal sanction, and a sharp counterpoint to the vast majority of cases where law enforcement conclusions are privileged and rarely second-guessed. As analyses of wrongful convictions have sadly but inevitably demonstrated, the screening methods of police and prosecutors are fallible. Moreover, the prevalence of “tunnel vision” once the decision to charge has been made means that few cases experience the kind of post-indictment investigation and reevaluation seen in the prosecution of Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Stage by stage, the Strauss-Kahn case illustrates how to counterbalance the presumption of guilt and give expression to the presumption of innocence in the pretrial period through vigilantly-invoked and enforced due process protections. Drawing from this examination, the paper will then explore how to approach this model process in the more standard cases, which typically see a fraction of the judicial, law enforcement, and defense resources afforded Dominique Strauss-Kahn. The Strauss-Kahn prosecution offers several insights, three of which will be sketched at the paper’s conclusion: a requirement that prosecutorial decision-making be subject to a reasonable doubt standard; vigilant and early enforcement of the prosecutor’s obligation to disclose information that is favorable to the accused; and finally, a requirement that a prosecutor explain in writing any decision to dismiss the felony charges in indicted felony cases, so that the factual, legal and policy bases of these decisions (numbering almost one quarter of New York’s superior court felony cases annually) can be analyzed and publicized.     

Creative Death Penalty Reform in China: The Case of Drug Transportation

China's criminal justice system has, for decades, been consistently notorious as one of the world's most punitive. Recent reform of the nation's decades‐long harsh criminal justice policy to instead balance severity with greater leniency has given reformist‐minded judges and legal experts some cause for optimism. However, it has also created a judicial dilemma in determining how to apply this more lenient ethos in sentencing some capital crimes. This is particularly the case for the capital crime of transporting drugs, which is the focus of this article. This article reveals how reform can be achieved through skillful legal maneuvering for a crime category that is caught between two contesting views of the social benefits of punishment.     

Who is Presumed Innocent of What by Whom?

The article analyses the components of the presumption of innocence and tries to clarify some of the conceptual and logical difficulties surrounding the notion of ‘innocence’ and the structure of legal presumptions. It is argued that all conceivable literal interpretations of the maxim make little or no sense, and that the presumptions form is, as such, devoid of original content: presumptions do not explain nor justify anything but are auxiliary norms which refer to the legal consequences spelled out in other norms. Therefore, the presumption of innocence can be used to express any kind of requirement and standard for the criminal process and the treatment of suspect citizens only in a tautological, albeit rhetorically forceful, way. This instrumental use of the presumption of innocence is theoretically without merit but can be practically beneficial as long as there is no developed system of fundamental rights and protections of individual freedoms in a given legal order. Finally, a functional understanding of the presumption of innocence is proposed which gives it an original, though limited field of application as a guarantee of the procedure itself, in particular of the openness of the outcome.     

证据法的基本权利保障取向

证据法的理性主义传统,既要求通过理性证明的方式去查明事实真相,而非诉诸神明和暴力;又不以追求真相为最高目的,而是将其视为实现正义的手段.这种理性传统,决定了法治国家证据制度具有求真、求善的双重功能,并将公正奉为首要价值,从而奠定了基本权利保障的价值取向.我国证据法学研究和证据制度建设正在经历从义务本位向权利本位转型,权...     

PRETREATMENT CHARACTERISTICS AND TREATMENT PERFORMANCE OF LEGALLY COERCED VERSUS VOLUNTARY METHADONE MAINTENANCE ADMISSIONS*

Analyses were conducted to determine whether addicts coerced into treatment by actions of the criminal justice system differed from voluntary entrants in terms of background characteristics, early risk factors, or drug use and criminal behavior during pretreatment, treatment, and post treatment periods. Subjects were categorized into high, moderate, and low legal coercion groups based on their official legal status, related narcotics testing requirements, and their self-reported perceptions of criminal justice system coercion. Those induced to enter the treatment program through legal channels had slightly higher rates of serious property offenses and higher proportions of time incarcerated and under legal supervision, but they did not differ from voluntary entrants in overall criminal behavior during pretreatment periods. All groups showed substantial improvement in level of narcotics use, criminal involvement, and most other behaviors during treatment, but there was some regression after treatment.     

Reporting sensational trials: Free press,a responsible press,and cameras in the courts

It is common today to criticize the media for the way in which they report sensational trials. Lawyers often join in this criticism, claiming that the portrayals harm their public image. This article examines such complaints and demonstrates that including cameras in the courts need not lengthen a criminal trial, nor substantially affect the judicial process. Using the O.J. Simpson criminal case as a backdrop, the article shows how delays in that case were caused not by cameras, but by the judge's inconsistent rulings that signaled to the defense lawyers that they were under a different and more lenient standard than the prosecutors. Surveys of American judges show that those who have experienced cameras in their own courtroom have come to the conclusion that such media coverage does not impede justice, aids the public in understanding the judicial process and has little effect on American's perceptions of lawyers. Those judges who have the urge to play to the cameras should ban them, but if they do not, the blame lies with them and not the media, which simply report what is happening.     

两高司法解释“曾因盗窃受过刑事处罚”规定解读

两高于2013年4月4日下发了《关于办理盗窃刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》,其中第2条第1款"曾因盗窃受过刑事处罚"的规定在司法实践中引起一定争议,包括对该规定时间效力的把握、盗窃前科的界定和受过刑事处罚范围的理解。检察机关在适用该款规定时,应当站在刑法体系整体协调的高度,严格遵循从旧兼从轻的刑事法律时间效力原则,运用正确的法律解释方法,坚持刑法谦抑和有利于犯罪嫌疑人的司法理念,有理有据、不枉不纵,确保检察工作法律效果和社会效果的良好统一。     

论刑事被告人宪法权利的保障——从无罪推定角度所做的分析

无罪推定原则是刑事犯罪嫌疑人、被告人宪法基本权利保障的原则之一。随着我国社会主义民主与法治的发展,从立法与司法的双重视角贯彻和推行无罪推定原则,不仅有利于保障犯罪嫌疑人的人权,而且有利于推动我国的法治进程。我国应在《宪法》中明文规定无罪推定原则,立法保障犯罪嫌疑人的沉默权,进一步明确与施行非法证据排除制度。     

Juvenile Delinquency in the Netherlands: Trends and Perspectives

A comparison is made, on several levels, of the laws of various states in the United States and the State of Israel concerning the crime of rape as personally committed by a husband upon his wife, known as “marital rape.” Among the fifty states, there is a sharp division whether such an act is criminal at all. The majority of states have held the act not criminal based primarily upon the common law doctrine of marital immunity first enunciated in England by Lord Hale. Some of these states have followed the Model Penal Code and codified the immunity concept within their criminal law.

Those states which have rejected Hale's immunity concept include New York, New Jersey, Alabama, and others. Upon judicial review, New York invalidated its statutory immunity for husbands by declaring it unconstitutional and a violation of the fourteenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution. New Jersey, as an example, statutorily eliminated the defense of marital immunity for rape, while other states simply rejected Hall's doctrine altogether. In 1980, Israel judicially rejected the defense of marital immunity insofar as a Jewish married couple was concerned by selectively utilizing Jewish religious law. It later enacted legislation eliminating the defense of marital immunity for rape for all persons regardless of religion.     

共同财产制下夫妻个人债务执行程序的规则建构

共同财产制是我国关于婚姻财产的法定财产制度,建构夫妻个人债务执行规则不能忽视共同财产制。当前民法典适用时期,以物权外观原则区分债务人财产为基础的夫妻个人债务执行规则陷入困境,应以共同财产制为基础建构新的执行规则。依据共同财产制,被执行人及其配偶夫妻关系存续期间获得的财产原则为共同财产,夫妻双方在共同财产内部具有同等的份额。相对于另行诉讼、追加被执行人配偶以及先析产再执行,直接执行一半夫妻共同财产是夫妻个人债务执行的可行方案。为顺利执行一半夫妻共同财产,可创设夫妻个人债务推定规则,共同财产查控规则,共同财产评估、控制、处置规则以及债务人配偶权利保护规则,实现法院执行与当事人权利保护之间的平衡。     

重构主义的刑法实践模式

重构主义立足于犯罪人与被害者、国家之间的关系网络,强调犯罪人与国家之间的合作,以此作为无罪认定或从宽处罚的依据。我国刑法有关行政或民事处理前置程序、犯罪后及时退还或上交等无罪处理的规定,刑事诉讼法对认罪认罚从宽处罚的规定,都只能从重构主义才能得以合理解释。刑法是法益保护法,而法益保护不只是指向过去,以确保保护法益被损害后的惩罚,同时也面向未来,激励行为人在保护法益被损害后及时修复。重构主义的制度实践,需要正确对待刑法中的"迷途知返条款"建构,强化犯罪治理上的"协约自治",并在部分经济犯、秩序犯中予以推广,使犯罪治理符合经济发展理性与社会发展理性。