有罪答辩与量刑减让

被告人的有罪答辩对其获得的量刑减让有着重要的作用和影响。在英美等国 ,有罪答辩是量刑减让的正当依据 ,但有罪答辩与量刑减让之间并不存在必然的因果关系 ,法官对被告人施以的量刑减让以及减让的程度 ,还需考虑犯罪的性质、被告人的基本情况等其他因素。同时 ,量刑减让制度对于被告人有罪答辩的作出又存在反作用。被告人有罪答辩的作出来自于律师、检察官和法官传递的量刑减让的信息 ,在英美等国 ,法官对量刑减让信息的披露是受到严格限制的。我国传统意义上的坦白属于被控人的一项法定义务 ,具有实体意义 ,不同于有罪答辩 ,故坦白从宽政策不具有正当性。与此同时 ,我国简易程序中对有罪答辩的量刑减让则具有正当性 ,但减让的实施较英美等国有较大的限制。     

Race and the probability of pleading guilty

The legal ramifications of pleading guilty and findings of an interdependence between pleading guilty and sentence severity suggest that the guilty plea decision is a significent turning point in case processing. The present research examines the variables affecting the probability of pleading guilty. The first analysis involves estimating a single probit equation of main effects of variables previously found to be related to pleading guilty. A second analysis is conducted estimating the same equation separately for black defendants and white defendants. Findings from the first part of the analysis indicate that physical evidence, number of charges, and confessing to the crime during police/prosecutor interrogation increase the probability of pleading guilty, whereas the number of witnesses, use of a weapon, and offenses carrying a minimum penalty of 5 years in custody with no maximum prison term decrease the probability of pleading guilty. Findings from the second analysis indicate that the effect of marital status, prior record of felony convictions, type of counsel, number of charges, and use of a weapon on the probability of pleading guilty varies by defendant's race. The research concludes by offering several competing explanations of these findings in hope of stimulating further research on the variables affecting the route of case disposition in felony processing.     

The “Distance Traveled”: Investigating the Downstream Consequences of Charge Reductions for Disparities in Incarceration

Abstract

Relatively little work examines the impact that charging decisions exert on sentencing. We investigate this issue by estimating the “distance traveled” in charge bargaining, or the expected change in the likelihood of incarceration associated with reductions in charges across different stages of prosecution. Using data from New York County, we examine how the probability of incarceration shifts as a result of charging decisions and how this potentially contributes to social inequalities in incarceration. Findings indicate that charge reductions are associated with sizeable decreases in the probability of incarceration, particularly at the plea bargaining stage. On average, the “distance traveled” is substantially greater for female than male defendants and for White compared to Latino and Black defendants, even after accounting for a host of relevant punishment factors. Findings are discussed as they relate to contemporary theoretical perspectives on prosecutorial decision-making and social inequality in punishment.     

Plea decision-making: the influence of attorney expertise,trustworthiness, and recommendation

ABSTRACT

Attorney recommendations influence defendant plea decisions; and the degree of influence likely rests on the perceived trustworthiness and level of expertise of the attorney (factors of source credibility). We explored attorney source credibility factors and how these characteristics influence defendants’ plea decision-making. MTurk participants read a hypothetical plea scenario and were asked to imagine themselves as the defendant in a DWI/DUI case making a plea decision; in the scenario, we manipulated the defense attorney’s level of trustworthiness, expertise, and plea recommendation. There was a significant interaction between attorney recommendation and trustworthiness on defendants’ plea decisions; participants who were advised to accept the guilty plea were more likely to plead guilty when the attorney was high in trustworthiness compared to low in trustworthiness. Attorney trustworthiness did not affect plea decisions for defendants advised to reject the guilty plea. Importantly, attorney trustworthiness affected defendants’ decision to follow the attorney’s recommendation and ultimate plea decision (regardless of expertise), and attorney expertise affected defendants’ confidence in their decision (regardless of trustworthiness). Results suggest individual-level characteristics of defense attorneys affect the influence of the attorney and their recommendation, and ultimately defendants’ plea decision-making.     

The Time Penalty: Examining the Relationship Between Time to Conviction and Trial vs. Plea Disparities in Sentencing

Although studies of sentencing routinely find that defendants who plead guilty receive relatively lenient sentences compared with similarly situated defendants convicted by trial, we have yet to fully understand the role of “mode of conviction” in the sentencing process. In particular, we know little about how the size of the disparity between guilty pleas and trial convictions may depend upon time in case processing, or the timing of pleas; that is, when during the process defendants plead guilty. This is a considerable issue, as “time” often is central to explanations given for plea-trial disparities. The current study examines this central, yet seldom empirically captured, dimension of the sentencing process. Using information gathered in an ancillary data collection effort operated under the supervision of the American Terrorism Study, we differentiate between the mode of conviction and time to conviction and explore the role of “time” in sentence severity, especially with regard to the plea-trial disparity. While consisting of defendants identified in connection with terrorism investigations, and sentenced in federal courts, our study takes advantages of a unique opportunity to isolate the effects of time from the mode of disposition and to explore time correlates of sentencing outcomes. In doing so, we raise important questions about the multiple ways in which time and mode of conviction may affect sentencing more generally and contribute to the larger theoretical discussions of how punishment decisions are made.     

Reflections on the Exercise of Prosecutorial Discretion 50 Years After Publication of The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society

In The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society, the U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice under President Johnson in 1967 acknowledged the influential role that prosecutors play but lamented the fact that their highly discretionary charging and plea bargaining decisions were often made haphazardly and inconsistently. The Commission called for more transparency and accountability in charging and plea bargaining processes. I examine the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in the 50 years since the publication of the Commission's report, with a focus on the results of research and changes in policy and practice. Although the charging and plea bargaining processes have not been subject to the type of scholarly scrutiny directed at judges’ sentencing decisions, the research that has been published in the past several decades has become more theoretically grounded, methodologically sophisticated, and transdisciplinary. In terms of policy, decisions handed down by the Supreme Court since the 1960s have provided some minimal regulation of charging and plea bargaining, and the reforms embraced by state and federal prosecutors have affected the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.     

Plea bargaining and appraisals of eyewitness evidence by prosecutors and defense attorneys

A sample of defense attorneys and prosecutors from matched California counties participated in a two-part study. Study 1A reports the results of a survey regarding how influential each of the 17 eyewitness factors is in affecting the accuracy of real eyewitness identifications. Generally, both attorney groups considered all eyewitness factors to be influential; on only 6 of the 17 factors were defense attorneys more likely than prosecutors to provide higher importance ratings. In Study 1B, the attorneys answered questions regarding their willingness to plea bargain after reading each of four scenarios in which (1) same- versus cross-race identification and (2) whether the perpetrator was familiar were experimentally manipulated. Both eyewitness factors influenced plea bargaining decisions, and effects were generally consistent for both attorney groups. Results confirm that plea bargaining decisions at least by defense attorneys are made ‘in the shadow of the trial,’ and that appraisals of the strength of eyewitness evidence play a significant role in these decisions.     

Low-Level,but High Speed?: Assessing Pretrial Detention Effects on the Timing and Content of Misdemeanor versus Felony Guilty Pleas

Abstract

While numerous studies have examined pretrial detention and felony case outcomes, little empirical attention has been devoted to misdemeanor pretrial detention. We theorize that misdemeanants detained for a longer proportion of time will plead guilty quicker because the costs of fighting their charges in jail often outweigh the sanctions they face. Utilizing data on 165,630 felony and misdemeanor cases from Miami-Dade County, Florida, during a 4-year period (2012–2015) we assess whether the effects of pretrial detention length on the timing and content of guilty pleas differ across lower-level and upper-level courts. Survival analyses and multinomial logistic regressions indicate that misdemeanor cases overall and those involving lengthier pretrial detention are resolved faster, with most resulting in non-carceral sanctions such as credit for time served (CTS). Given that misdemeanors make-up the bulk of U.S. criminal cases, these findings reveal important insights about how pretrial detention impacts case-processing dynamics in lower courts.     

建立控辩协商程序与完善检察官自由裁量权

在未来《刑事诉讼法》的修订中,借鉴外域“辩诉交易”制度,建立起具有中国特色的“控辩协商”程序,已经得到学界和司法实务界的认可。“控辩协商”程序的设立和运行与检察官自由裁量权的行使具有不可分割的关系,应该以外域实施辩诉交易制度需要的检察官自由裁量权为参照系,进一步丰富和完善我国检察机关自由裁量权的内容,为建立和实施控辩协商程序提供制度上的支持。     

服刑能力的司法鉴定及相关因素分析

目的探讨影响服刑能力的相关因素。方法采用自编服刑能力调查表对309例服刑犯人的鉴定资料进行回顾性调查分析,采用SPSS 13.0软件统计并进行服刑能力影响因素的相关性分析。结果两组在受教育程度、职业分布和婚姻状况上有显著性差异(P(0.01);两组在送鉴原因、案件类型、刑期、精神病学诊断多方面亦有显著性差异(P(0.01)。Logistic回归分析表明精神病学诊断、概念紊乱、刑罚认知、违规认知、接受教育、睡眠障碍与服刑能力的评定均呈显著性相关(r=1.901~28.711P=0.000~0.045)。结论服刑能力的评定与送鉴原因、案件类型、刑期、精神病学诊断、概念紊乱、刑罚认知、违规认知、接受教育和睡眠障碍密切相关。     

Using court culture to strengthen the administration of trial courts

Managerial culture defines the character of administrative practices in trial courts, shaping the way cases are handled, participants in the legal process are treated, and how a court functions as an institution. In fact, the notion of local legal culture is part of the conventional wisdom. What is missing in such discussions are the benefits of a comprehensive methodological approach to translate rich ideas and hunches into the measurement of court culture. In response, researchers at the National Center for State Courts have developed an analytical framework including a conceptual typology of culture, an instrument for measuring managerial culture and a schema for interpreting results within and between courts. The essay concludes with an invitation for the People＇s Republic of China to adapt the framework to understand the nature of culture in their courts of first instance.     

量刑的理论与实践研究——量刑基准的确立

同样性质、同样情节、同样后果的犯罪,受到不同的处罚,必然会引起人们对法律公正的怀疑,动摇人们对法律的信仰和信心.量刑的公正应当体现在不同个案的相互比较中.刑法规定的法定量刑情节需要一个参照基准,应在假定不考虑犯罪人的具体法定量刑情节的基础上,考虑犯罪人所有的与犯罪有关的全部犯罪细节包括酌定情节,抽象地确定这一犯罪应当适用的基准刑罚,再在此基础上,考虑量刑的法定情节,对基准刑罚进行适当的调整.目前需要做的工作是在立法方面进一步细化法定刑范围,通过司法解释进一步明确量刑标准,承认案例的指导作用.     

Research on the judicial review and variation of sentence for the death penalty with a suspension of execution in Chinese criminal law

The imposition of a death penalty with a suspension of execution (DPSE) for two years, and the procedure for judicial review of the DPSE both demonstrate the Chinese policies of “reduction in use of the death penalty,” “cautious application of the death penalty,” and “tempering justice with mercy.” In recent years, the number of cases in which the defendant was sentenced to death and immediately executed has declined, whereas the number of cases in which a DPSE sentence was given has increased. In China, judicial theory and practice generally emphasize the importance of the judicial review procedure in cases where the sentence is a death penalty with immediate execution. However, less attention has been paid to the procedures for review and variation of sentence in DPSE cases. Judicial review for DPSE sometimes exists in name only, and is sometimes overlooked altogether, which is inappropriate for a penalty of this severity. There are also serious shortcomings in the laws regulating the review procedure for the DPSE, which lack provisions specifying the consequences for serious violations of due process during trial, nor do they completely reflect the principle of in dubio pro reo. In the procedure for variation of the DPSE sentence, the relevant laws do not adequately uphold the defendant’s right to a defense or participation in the process. There are also difficulties regarding the time limits on ruling on a commutation of sentence. In order to make the procedure more reliable and guarantee the substantive rights of defendants sentenced to the DPSE, the relevant laws require a number of modifications and improvements.     

论刑事审判监督程序的提起主体--从控审分离的视角审视

从控审分离的视角审视,现行法律规定法院自行提起审判监督程序,不符合控审分离的要求,不利于实现诉讼公正,导致了诉讼职能的混乱,不利于保障被告人权利,因此应取消法院自行提起审判监督权。为了维护原审被告的权益、要改造现行的申诉制度,赋予被告申请再审权。     

反垄断效率抗辩适用模式及不确定性克服

反垄断法上的效率抗辩,是指经营者通过证明集中的效率效果足以抵消或超过反竞争效果而取得反垄断法豁免。在效率抗辩的适用上,世界范围内存在抵消分析、一体分析和混合分析三种模式。基于我国国情和《反垄断法》的相关规定,我国更宜采用混合分析模式。在此基础上,还需要借助相应措施克服效率抗辩本身的不确定性,提高制度运用的可能性。     

从“审被告”到“审证人”?--诉讼制度改革背景下刑事庭审模式转型刍议

以“审被告”为主要特色的我国传统刑事庭审模式已经不能适应时代要求,为此应当构建一种以“审证人”为主要内容和表征的刑事庭审模式。我国新颁布的刑事诉讼法在要求和强制证人出庭方面的进步,体现了“审被告”模式向“审证人”模式转变的思路。而当下我国正在推行的变“以侦查为中心”为“以审判为中心”的诉讼制度改革,为庭审模式的转变提供了新的动力和契机。今后的刑事庭审模式改革,应在坚持已有进展的基础上,继续强化证人出庭力度,完善严格证明规则,同时赋予被告人沉默权,逐渐淡化“审被告”模式色彩,实现“审被告”模式向“审证人”模式的彻底转变。     

提升海事审判软实力为建设海洋强国、实现经济腾飞保驾护航

中国海事法院审判在三十年的实践中促进中国海事海商法律不断发展完善,海事法院公正透明的司法审判不仅为中国航运物流企业的发展提供了有效保障,而且使中国逐渐成为亚太海事司法中心,赢得了全球的认同和赞誉.提出应进一步提升海事审判“软实力”,为建设海洋强国和经济腾飞保驾护航.     

论市场经济国家对劳资冲突的法律规制

西方市场经济国家劳资关系经历了一个较长发展时期,逐步形成一套比较完整的规制劳资冲突的法律制度。主要表现为通过劳动基准、团结权、集体谈判和产业行动立法,规制双方行为,将冲突纳入法制化轨道中。同时,建立完善的劳资争议处理法律制度,作为解决劳资冲突的底线。     

Disentangling the Effects of Bounding and Mobility on Reports of Criminal Victimization

Replacement respondents who move into NCVS households after the initial bounding interview can introduce measurement error since their reports of victimization may be influenced by their mobility (actual experiences) and by their unbounded interview status (response error). Which of these factors affects reporting is unknown and is the focus of this research. The availability of incoming respondent data from the NCVS School Crime Supplement and mobility status from the NCVS provides a unique opportunity to study these effects separately. Both bounding and mobility were found to influence reporting; however, this influence was not consistent. Unlike findings from past research, bounding only had significant effects on reports of property victimization. Conversely, moving only significantly affected reports of violent victimization. As this study is the first to disentangle the effect of unbounded interview status from mobility on reports of victimization, the findings emphasize the need for further research to better understand these issues.