美国未成年人辩诉交易运行机制研究

在美国刑事司法实践中,绝大部分案件包括未成年人案件都可适用辩诉交易.而作为与刑事司法并行的司法制度,美国少年司法在恪守“国家亲权”理念及“儿童最佳利益”原则的基础上,亦逐步加大了辩诉交易的适用.刑事司法与少年司法双轨制下的未成年人辩诉交易在制度设计、程序运作及司法救济上存在一定差异,亦面临一系列质疑与规制.     

百年嬗变:美国少年司法之溯源、衍变及展望

少年司法肇始于美国,至今已有110余年的历史。但美国少年司法发展历程并非一帆风顺,先后历经前少年法院时期、少年法院创设与探索期、少年权利时期以及少年司法晚近变革期等四个主要阶段。其间,少年司法政策因实证主义兴起与新刑事古典主义复兴等社会思潮交叉影响不免时常进退辗转,甚至出现少年法院废除论的主张。对美国少年司法与未成年人保护追根溯源及总结,以吸取其改革中的经验与教训,以供构建我国少年司法制度反省、参酌和借鉴实有必要。     

末成年人刑事案件恢复性司法研究

随着国际性人权保障运动的广泛开展，被害人在刑事诉讼中的权利问题引起人们的广泛关注，在此背景下产生的恢复性司法被认为能有效地保护被害人的权利、复原被害人所遭受的损失，在世界许多国家尤其在西方国家产生着日益重要的影响。西方国家出于既保护少年，又保护社会利益的目的，在少年刑事司法实践中开始推行恢复性司法，减少对犯罪少年使用传统的监禁刑。本文旨在通过对未成年人刑事案件恢复性司法研究，对未成年人犯罪有一个清醒的认识，从而更好的指导司法实践．     

论未成年人刑事司法的社会支持体系

未成年人刑事司法具有较强的社会属性,其有效运行有赖于发达的社会支持体系。我国未成年人刑事司法面临的突出问题是社会参与程度低,司法机关与社会力量之间的信息共享及资源链接机制不健全、青少年司法社工力量不足以及政府资金支持缺位,导致社会支持难以体系化、规范化和常态化。厘清社会支持体系的内涵、结构、主体范围及其内容,为未成年人刑事司法社会支持体系建设奠定理论基础。通过建立信息共享及资源链接机制、实现未成年人刑事司法与社会工作相结合,以保障社会支持的有效性。通过制定社会参与规则、设立统筹社会支持体系建设的机构、探索多元化的资金支持途径,以实现社会支持的可持续发展。     

未成年人刑事司法实践中的创新与规范的冲突及选择

本文主要论述了近年来未成年人刑事司法实践中的创新举措、未成年人刑事司法工作的开拓创新的诉讼价值等,以期对解决未成年人刑事司法实践中的创新与规范的冲突及选择问题有所助益。     

评最高人民法院少年综合庭试点改革

作为一项建国以来我国少年司法领域最重大的一次统一少年司法改革措施,最高人民法院少年综合庭试点改革所创造的机遇与风险并存。从改革的总体方向而言,其少年法庭的"非刑事化"、独立化的目标符合各国少年司法改革的经验与少年司法制度的特性要求,也有着稳定少年法庭机构与队伍,推动中国未成年人保护法制进步的意义。但从改革的思路与具体设计来看,过于"跳跃式"地扩充受案范围,可能会造成少年法庭失去特性、脱离少年司法传统,以及限制地方少年司法探索等风险。     

未成年人刑事司法的模式选择与制度构建

未成年人刑事司法改革,涉及司法模式的选择、特殊原则的确立及具体制度的完善等问题。我国未成年人刑事司法模式选择,应当采用恢复性司法模式为主、传统司法模式为辅的组合设计;除一般性原则外,未成年人刑事诉讼程序还应采用特殊关照义务、非羁押为主、羁押为例外、非刑罚化等特殊原则。在具体制度构建上应建立合适成年人制度、未成年人刑事记录消灭制度、涉罪未成年人社区矫正制度等。     

国家亲权理论与少年司法——以美国少年司法为中心的研究

国家亲权理论是英美法系国家少年司法制度的基本理论根基,它强调国家对未成年人的积极保护责任,要求超越报应主义观念,遵循"未成年人最大利益原则"来处理少年罪错行为。国家亲权理论对于克服刑事古典学派的弊端,推动少年司法制度的进步发挥了重要的作用。但国家亲权理论在少年司法中的应用容易产生理念与实践之间的落差,如何缩小这种落差是英美国家少年司法改革的重要特征。中国的少年司法政策与国家亲权理论存在一定的类同之处,在今后的少年司法改革中应当注意吸收国家亲权理论与英美国家少年司法整合历程中的经验与教训。     

“相称原则”在中国少年刑事审判中的体现与运用

人们通常认为“相称原则”作为一项惩治与预防未成年人犯罪的特有原则源于1985年联合．国第40届会议通过的《北京规则》。该规则确立了对少年刑事立法与司法最重要的一项原则——保护少年权益与保护社会利益的双向保护原则，体现了对少年刑事立法与司法中保护与保障的和谐统一。本文以对少年犯罪特有的“相称原则”为切入点，探讨这一原则提出的历史背景及价值底蕴。自从1899年美国首家少年法庭诞生之后的近百年，人们经过不断探索、反思、总结而达成共识出台的《北京规则》及其所确立的“相称原则”，基子少年犯罪的特殊性形成了诉权保护的双重性基础理论，并充分体现了以保护少年为主兼顾保护社会利益的刑罚价值取向。在此认识基础上，本文用这一原则检视中国未成年人刑事立法与司法的反应，并结合最高人民法院2006年第1号司法解释，着眼于实务，分别就少年刑事审判之程序操作和定罪量刑两个方面如何贯彻运用这一原则阐释见解，以益于少年刑事司法。     

略论少年司法制度的改革与完善

改革和完善少年司法制度是建设和谐社会和实施宽严相济的刑事政策的必然要求。我国应当制定综合性的少年法,完善少年司法的程序法规则,创新少年司法工作机制,逐步推行少年犯行刑社会化,建立少年刑事法院,组建少年司法队伍。     

A Practical Approach to Evaluating and Improving Juvenile Justice Programs

For more than a decade, the juvenile justice field in the United States has been dominated by the seventh “moral panic” over juvenile delinquency. This panic led to an overreaction to juvenile delinquency by legislators and juvenile justice officials. The main consequence is a “crisis of overload” in many state and local juvenile justice systems across the country. Tools are available to help juvenile courts effectively manage the overload of court clients. Most important, a new method has been developed for evaluating existing programs against research‐based standards that have been synthesized from juvenile justice program evaluations. This tool enables states and localities to take a practical approach to improving juvenile justice system programs.     

Adultification in Juvenile Corrections: Examining the Orientations of Juvenile and Adult Probation and Parole Officers

Legislative activity, court decisions, and other activities have left open to question how distinct is the juvenile justice system from the criminal justice system. While several scholars have considered adultification of juvenile courts, no study has systematically examined the adultification of juvenile corrections. The present study assesses whether one type of juvenile corrections, probation and parole, has been adultified by comparing the professional orientations of juvenile and adult probation and parole officers. The study finds that juvenile probation and parole officers do differ from adult officers across several dimensions of professional orientation that are critical to the distinctiveness of the juvenile justice system. Specifically, our analyses show that compared to adult probation and parole officers, juvenile officers tend to more strongly adhere to ideals of treatment, welfare, and offender-focused probation and parole supervision.     

美国少年司法严罚刑事政策的形成、实践与未来

建立独立的少年司法制度，在保护主义的理念下处理少年犯罪，曾经是美国的骄傲，也是其他国家效仿的范本。但自20世纪70年代后期开始，严罚刑事政策开始逐步占据美国少年司法刑事政策的主流，呈现出逐步背弃福利型少年司法传统的趋势。这种转变是在少年犯罪恶化与古典犯罪学派复兴的社会背景与理论背景下发生的，也是对少年司法理念的歪曲。少年司法严罚刑事政策的推行激化了少年法院存废的争论，也遭到了激烈的批评和日益深入的反思。     

The Impact of Time on Parent Perspectives on the Barriers to Services and the Service Needs of Youths in the Juvenile Justice System

The purposes of this study were: 1) to assess the overall perspectives of parents (N=115) of youths in the juvenile justice system on the barriers to and services needs of youths in the juvenile justice system; and 2) to assess the strength of the relationship between duration of time the youth has been involved in the juvenile justice system and parent perceptions of barriers and service needs. The top service need was case management. Statistically significant moderate negative correlations were found between duration of time in the juvenile justice system and Total Barrier score, and all composite barrier scores (i.e., Mismatch, Red Tape, and Inaccessibility). Statistically significant small negative correlations were found between duration of time in the juvenile justice system and the Total Service Needs score and two composite scores: Substance Abuse Services and Out‐of‐Home Services.     

Punishment,Accountability, and the New Juvenile Justice

The juvenile justice system has undergone radical change in the past three decades. The procedural revolution that began at the end of the 1960s with the Gault decision has more recently evolved into a substantive revolution. The changes in juvenile justice have been many and in some instances drastic, particularly in the apparent demise of the rehabilitative ideal. New theories or models have emerged, incorporating terminology such as punishment, justice, and accountability into the vocabulary of juvenile justice practitioners and the lexicon of state juvenile codes. The transformation in the philosophy and underlying goals of the system has been well-documented over the past decade or so. It is now time to ask critical questions about the significance and meaning of this transformation and to bring attention to unresolved issues. This article suggests the issues that need to be addressed in order to make both practical and philosophical sense out of the changes in the mission of “juvenile justice.”     

‘Getting Tough’ With Youth Legislative waiver as crime control

In the rush to punish juvenile offenders and to reform the juvenile justice system, legislatures have redefined the philosophy of juvenile justice and restructured the waiver process. As the convergence of juvenile and adult systems continues, the future of juvenile justice has become the new object of politicalization. This paper critiques the politics of ‘get-tough’ legislation and the implications of legislative waivers. The authors review the language and intent of waiver reforms, images of juvenile justice and the concept of crime control.     

美国少年司法的新近发展

作为世界上第一个少年司法制度的诞生地———美国 ,它的少年司法体系的改革令人关注。本文回顾了美国少年司法政策的发展历史 ,并系统地检验了美国少年司法体制 ,总结了美国少年司法的历史 ,阐述了美国少年司法近年来的发展状况 ,这些发展推动了学者们对美国少年司法的深入研究 ,从而为处理青少年偏差行为指明了合理、有效的策略。本文还涉及到意识形态、政治策略和媒体对少年司法的公共政策的影响问题 ,最后探讨了将来美国少年司法领域中可能出现的争议。     

The Justice Model in the Juvenile Justice System: Washington State's Experience

In 1977, the Washington State Legislature enacted radical modifications of its juvenile justice code. Explicitly abandoning the parens patriae philosophy of the juvenile justice system, a "justice" philosophy was adopted. Provisions of the law include a determinate sentencing structure, the divestiture of status offenses, greater due process rights for juveniles, and a formalized diversion process which emphasizes accountability rather than treatment. This paper brings together the available research on the implementation of the law to assess how the introduction of a justice approach has influenced equality, fairness, and punishment levels in Washington State's juvenile justice system.     

The Kids are Alright: Making a Case for Abolition of the Juvenile Justice System

When considering abolition of the criminal justice system, there is no greater or more impactful relevance than for juveniles that find themselves inextricably linked to the juvenile justice system. From its inception, the philosophical foundation of juvenile care was to provide individualized, compassionate assistance to young men and women perceived to be in need of emotional care and/or social control. With the establishment of the Cook County Juvenile Court in 1899, the American juvenile justice system has endured a 118-year odyssey that has produced progressively rational, largely unsympathetic, and increasingly punitive practices. With happenings such as the ‘school-to-prison pipeline’, ‘juvenile life without the possibility of parole’, ‘teen courts’, and ‘deferred prosecution probation’, current juveniles that make unassuming mistakes and errors in judgment are adjoined to a system that sustains and reinforces itself through these mistakes and errors. The charge of this article is to recommend the abolition of the contemporary juvenile justice system, with safeguards for the protection from serious offenders and a return to the compassionate care that is warranted for the majority of juveniles that currently bolster the system.     

The power model of juvenile justice

The author first identifies those characteristics which distinguish the juvenile justice system from its more widelypublicized counterpart, the criminal justice system. He next demonstrates how many textbooks in this area fail to portray adequately the uniqueness of juvenile justice. He concludes by developing and explaining the “Power Model,” which more accurately describes the juvenile justice system.