Calling Your Bluff: How Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys Adapt Plea Bargaining Strategies to Increased Formalization

This ethnographic work examines the inner workings of a highly formalized plea bargaining unit in a large urban prosecutor’s office from the lawyers’ point of view. Observations of forty two plea negotiations between prosecutors and defense attorneys along with both formal and informal interviews reveal how the legal actors adapt to institutional rules in the pursuit of the both efficiency and justice. In the face of ever increasing prosecutorial power, defense attorneys find ways to equalize the balance when cases do not fit the “normal crimes” model. Examination of negotiating strategy and discourse give further insight into whether prosecutors and defense attorneys behave differently under highly rationalized systems of plea‐bargaining compared with traditional models previously studied.     

辩护律师对法庭的真实义务

美国著名的辩护律师艾伦·德肖微茨教授在其名著《最好的辩护》一书曾说到:“被告辩护律师,特别是在为确实有罪的被告辩护时,他的工作就是用一切合法的手段来隐瞒‘全部事实’。对被告辩护律师来说,如果证据是用非法手段取得的,或该证据带有偏见,损害委托人的利益,那么他不仅应     

现有技术抗辩制度本质论

现有技术抗辩制度与无效制度不同,其理论基础在于善意第三人可得利益的保护,亦即在被控侵权人为善意的情况下,其具有通过检索等方式,合法获得涉案专利申请日之前公开的自由公知技术的可得利益;且具有通过获得涉案专利申请日之前公开的专利的专利权人实施许可等方式,合法使用在先专利的可得利益。     

To Waive or Not to Waive: The Right to Trial and Plea Bargaining

Criminal defendants in many countries are faced with a dilemma: If they waive their right to trial and plead guilty, they typically receive charge or sentence reductions in exchange for having done so. If they exercise their right to trial and are found guilty, they often receive stiffer sanctions than if they had pled guilty. I characterize the former as ‘waiver rewards’ and the latter as ‘non-waiver penalties.’ After clarifying the two and considering the relation between them, I briefly explicate the grounds for a moral right to trial. I then assess the defensibility of such rewards and penalties. In addition to considering whether waiver rewards and non-waiver penalties serve the aims of legal punishment, I address the three main arguments for permitting them. The first suggests that defendants willing to plead display more remorse for their crimes and thus are deserving of lighter sentences. The second defends waiver rewards and non-waiver penalties in cases where prosecutors are alleged to know that defendants are guilty but face problems establishing their guilt at trial. The third holds that guilty defendants who are willing to plead conserve scarce state resources and should be rewarded for it, whereas those unwilling to plead squander such resources and should be penalized accordingly. I contend that none of these arguments provides persuasive grounds for waiver rewards or non-waiver penalties, even on the assumption that we can distinguish those defendants who should waive their right to trial from those who should not. This conclusion presents a fundamental challenge to contemporary plea bargaining practices.

The Ethics of Plea Bargaining in International Criminal Trials

The paper argues that contemporary theoretical and philosophical concerns relating to the practice of plea bargaining in international trials for crimes such as genocide should be seen in the broader context of the perceived legitimacy of international trial justice. The paper questions the capacity of international trial structures to deliver a form of truth which contributes to justice suggesting that the legitimacy of the truth available is conditioned by ideology and normative practice. The paper suggests that the key to transforming international trial justice lies in promoting the link between trial ideology and the perceived moral legitimacy of its outcomes through the exercise of judicial discretionary power. Ralph Henham is Professor of Criminal Justice, Nottingham Law School, Nottingham Trent University.     

论辩诉交易制度的生命基础

以辩诉交易为代表的控辩合作纠纷解决机制是近年来世界范围内刑事案件处理的一种新型模式,越来越展现出其强大的生命力.司法效益观是辩诉交易制度产生与发展之本体因素,契约观是辩诉交易制度产生与发展之基础因素,实用主义思想观是辩诉交易制度产生与发展之动力因素,抗辩式诉讼结构是辩诉交易制度之支持因素,沉默权与证据开示是辩诉交易制度之促生因素,发达的辩护制度是辩诉交易之保障因素.     

从建立被告人有罪答辩制度到引入辩诉交易--论美国辩诉交易制度的借鉴意义

美国辩诉交易制度对于我国刑事司法改革具有借鉴意义,即在我国有必要建立被告人有罪答辩制度.具体而言,应对现行简易程序进行改造完善,主要是建立被告人认罪从轻、减轻刑罚制度,并扩大案件适用范围.还有必要探索引入辩诉交易制度,建立中国式辩诉交易,应着重制度建设.应对适用案件范围、适用条件作出明确规定,还应建立严密的适用程序,保障制度以及司法审查机制.     

论辩诉交易对反贪工作之借鉴

在贪污贿赂等职务犯罪案件的侦查起诉工作中引入辩诉交易制度,可以加大反贪力度,达到遏制和预防腐败的目的。首先是辩诉交易的概念与特征;其次,引入辩诉交易可以从体现司法公正性、完善司法豁免体系和提高司法效益;最后是引入辩诉交易后的司法上如何运作及应遵循的主要原则。     

解读美国辩诉交易制度

辩诉交易虽源于英国 ,但却在美国发扬光大 ,成为美国刑事司法最具特色的制度之一。只有比较全面准确地了解辩诉交易制度的来龙去脉、实施情况、存在的问题以及对辩诉交易的各种评价之后 ,才能根据我国的法制环境进一步研究是否引入 ,如何引入的问题。     

我国引进辩诉交易制度的可行性

"辩诉交易"制度是被国外广为适用的一项刑事诉讼制度,其中检察官占有重要的角色.而我国能否借鉴或引进辩诉交易,一直是学术界探讨和争论的焦点.为此,本文从比较的视角出发,主张我国引进该制度并回答了如何引进问题.     

域外辩诉交易的发展及其启示

辩诉交易源于美国。其后,辩诉交易在德国的传播实践叫"刑事协商";在意大利刑事诉讼法典中被规定为"依当事人要求适用刑罚程序";在俄罗斯刑事诉讼法典中被称为"在刑事被告人同意对他提出的指控时做出法院判决的特别程序",通称为认罪程序;日本学者建议在对其简略程序改造时增加该程序叫做"司法交易";而在英国、加拿大等国家中仍然习惯称之为"辩诉交易"。辩诉交易从在美国之发端,到在加拿大等国家之广为传播,其之所以在一片抨击与责难声中,仍能保持如此旺盛的生命力,根源于该制度所独具的、其它诸多刑事司法制度所无法媲美的价值蕴涵。     

法、意辩诉交易制度比较研究——兼论美国经验在欧陆的推行与阻碍

近几年来,辩诉交易程序在欧陆出现了"普适化"的趋势。1989年,意大利在《刑事诉讼法典》中引入了意大利式的辩诉交易制度,成为欧洲大陆第一个引入辩诉交易制度的国家。2003年6月,意大利立法者为进一步实现"诉讼经济"的目的再次扩大了辩诉交易程序的适用范围,研究表明,这一修改对于提高诉讼效率卓有成效。2004年3月,以固守自身法律传统著称的法国也设立了"法式辩诉交易制度",即所谓的庭前认罪答辩程序。这意味着辩诉交易制度已经跨越了法系的界限,全面实施于欧洲大陆的各个主要国家。辩诉交易的普适性并不意味着各国的辩诉交易程序整齐划一。事实恰恰相反。意大利和法国在辩诉交易程序的设计上大不相同,也与辩诉交易"来源国"美国差异极大。这充分说明了美国经验在欧陆的推行时面临着诸多阻碍,也产生诸多变异。     

略论美国辩诉交易制度及检察官的作用

一、美国辩诉交易制度的确立和运用 辩诉交易在美国由来已久。早在19世纪80年代初期,美国康涅狄格州的一些刑事案件中就已经出现了这种交易,但早期的辩诉交易在美国是处于"地下状态"的。美国联邦最高法院于1970年在Brady V.U.S.《Brady V.United States,379,U.S.742,752-53(1970)》一案的判决中正式确认了辩诉交易的合法性。在第二年对Santobell V.New York案的判决中,最高法院再一次强调了它的合法性:"如果每一项刑事指控均要经受完整的司法审判,那么州政府和联邦政府需要将其法官的数量和法庭设施增加许多倍"。     

构建中国式认罪协商制度的实践探索——浙江省绍兴市基层检察机关认罪轻案程序改革实证分析

面对刑事案件量激增的社会现实，为实现案件的有效分流，更好地保护犯罪嫌疑人（被告人）的权利，对轻微犯罪切实贯彻宽缓刑事政策，浙江省绍兴市基层检察机关进行了认罪轻案程序改革，改革取得了初步成效。但要构建独立的中国式认罪协商制度，必须修改《刑事诉讼法》，建立全面的讯问犯罪嫌疑人时律师在场制度，明确适用认罪协商案件的范围，赋予认罪协商以明确的法律效力。     

辩诉交易在中国的发展前景——以契约为分析框架

从辩诉交易制度的起源以及发展动因来看 ,它体现了一种契约精神、一种与当前多元社会相契合的观念 ,是其在现今美国茁壮成长、并波及很多国家的根本原因。笔者以契约观念为分析框架 ,对辩诉交易制度能否扎根于中国、我们是否具备了相应的观念与制度条件等问题进行了初步讨论。本文也意欲给司法改革的倡导者们提个醒 :在当前中国真正的程序正义理念尚未真正确立之际 ,却出现了具有后现代意味的契约式司法 ,应该如何处理其间的关系 ?     

A Community Divided: Defense Attorneys and the Ethics of Death Row Volunteering

When death row inmates elect to waive appeals and proceed directly to execution a series of problematic legal and ethical questions are raised. This article examines the ethics of volunteering from the perspective of death row inmates'defense attorneys. Studying attorneys is important for two reasons: since they are charged with protecting their clients'interests they must resolve the difficult question of whether death is ever in someone's best interest; and perhaps more important, most death row defense attorneys are themselves against the death penalty and must thus negotiate between their clients'desire for execution and their own personal value systems. Interviews were conducted with 20 attorneys who have participated in representing would-be volunteers. Qualitative analysis suggests that most are faced with profound ethical dilemmas, both professional and personal, when a client elects to waive appeals. This article explores how attorneys interpret, experience, and resolve those dilemmas.     

我国侦查阶段律师辩护制度之完善

辩护权在犯罪嫌疑人、被告人各项权利中,居于核心的地位。应当说,刑事诉讼的文明史就是辩护权的发展史。由于律师辩护对于被追诉人权利保障的重要性,世界上发达国家已将律师的辩护权从审判阶段扩展到侦查阶段。我国1996年修改的《刑事诉讼法》也规定了律师有权介入侦查程序并享有一定的诉讼权利,但是在立法上和司法实践中还存在诸多问题。     

在专利侵权纠纷中合理运用自由公知技术抗辩

"自由公知技术"的概念最早来源于德国法,它与我国专利法第22条规定的"现有技术"相一致1,是指专利申请日之前在国内外出版物上公开发表过、在国内公开使用过或者以其他方式为公众所知的技术内容.     

我国目前不宜引进辩诉交易的原因考

辩诉交易始于美国,美式辩诉交易是由一整套相互支撑的配套程序组合而成的.其中,证据展示和答辩制度是其前提程序,辩诉交易过程中还必须遵循几项具体原则,法律上同时为该交易设立了特殊的后续程序与救济程序.该制度有别于英国、意大利刑事诉讼程序中的"辩诉交易"以及中国的简易程序,我国目前尚不具备适用美式辩诉交易的主客观环境,不适宜引进该程序.