Judge-versus attorney-conducted voir dire

Broeder (1965) found that potential jurors frequently distort their replies to questions posed during the voir dire. Considerable controversy has arisen over whether more honest, accurate information is elecited by a judge or by an attorney. The experiment manipulated two target (judge-versus attorney-conducted voir dire) and two interpersonal style variables (personal versus formal). The dependent measure was the consistency of subjects' attitude reports given at pretest and again verbally in court. One-hundred-and-sixteen jury-eligible community residents participated. The results provide support for the hypothesis that attorneys are more effective than judges in eliciting candid self-disclosure from potential jurors. Subjects changed their answers almost twice as much when questioned by a judge as when interviewed by an attorney. It was suggested that the judge's presence evokes considerable pressure toward conformity to a set of perceived judicial standards among jurors, which is minimized during an attorney voir dire.     

The socialization of jurors the voir dire as a rite of passage

The socialization of jurors, which takes place as a latent function of the voir dire, is described in terms of the distinct experiences that constitute the passage from the status of “ordinary citizen” to membership in the courtroom social setting. Implications of the lack of this voir dire socialization on mock jury research are discussed. Future research on the significance of the juror role and the extent to which the socialization during voir dire helps jurors set aside their normal decision-making rules are also discussed.     

The Disposition of Felony Arrests

While we know a great deal about the disposition of felony arrests that reach the trial stage, we know little about the details of the dispositions reached without trial. And yet, this latter category forms as a rule over 90 percent, in New York City 98 percent, of all dispositions. Basing his analysis on a study done in the early 1970s, the author describes and presents data on the various stages in the process from arrest to final disposition through plea bargaining, trial, or dismissal of the case. For the first time, this usually opaque disposition pattern prior to trial emerges in the clarity of 23 graphs that illustrate the analysis. Of particular interest are some new insights into the mechanism of the plea bargaining process.     

Gender Differences in Felony Court Processing:

Interactive analyses examined three related hypotheses of disparity. The typicality hypothesis proposes that women are treated with chivalry in criminal processing, but only when their charges are consistent with stereotypes of female offenders. Selective chivalry predicts that decision makers extend chivalry disproportionately to white females. Differential discretion suggests that disparity is most likely in informal decisions such as charge reduction rather than in formal decisions at final sentencing. Data for the analysis derived from 9,966 felony theft cases and 18,176 felony assault cases disposed in California in 1988. Gender disparity was evident in findings that females with no prior record were more likely than similar males to receive charge reductions, and this enhanced females' chances for probation. The only indication of selective chivalry was a greater tendency to change charges of assault to nonassault among white female defendants than among minority females. Pivotal decisions concerning charge reduction provided partial support for the notion of differential discretion. The findings provided no clear support for the typicality thesis.     

建立中国轻罪制度的理论选择——以劳动教养为范例的分析

一、问题及其意义 1987年,劳动教养立法就列入了我国的“七五”立法规划,1991年和1995年又分别被列入我国的“八五”立法规划和“九五”立法规划。司法部劳动教养管理局、原国务院法制局和全国人大为劳动教养法的出台,做了大量艰苦细致的工作。但劳教立法十多年的实践已经证明,劳动教养立法最为缺乏的是有力的理论支撑。虽然,从表面上看,劳动教养法典起草过程中,遇到的最主要和最棘手的问题是有关部门权力和利益的分配与协调。实质上,这些问题如果不首先从理论上即学理上给予说明,就会导致在立法上,不     

我国刑法中轻罪与重罪若干问题研究

我国刑法中轻罪与重罪的划分,仅指轻罪行与重罪行的划分。在学术界关于区分轻罪和重罪的四种观点中,以一定法定刑为标准认定罪行的轻重具有充分的依据。认定轻罪和重罪法定刑的分界线当以有期徒刑3年为限,即凡法定最低刑为3年或3年以上有期徒刑的罪行都是重罪,反之便是轻罪。我国刑法存在若干轻罪与重罪界限不明的条文,需调整其罪刑关系。犯罪的未完成形态只存在于重罪之中。     

法国重罪陪审制度的启示与借鉴

陪审制度具有重要的政治意蕴与司法功能。在法国,对于法定刑较重的重大案件,实行以随机方式抽选一般国民担任陪审员,由陪审员与职业法官组成合议庭,共同审理案件,一起决定定罪量刑的制度。法国重罪陪审制度对于完善我国人民陪审员制度,如构建重罪、复杂案件由陪审团审理的制度,取消对陪审员学历的要求、确立科学的陪审员遴选程序与陪审团评议表决程序方面具有重要的借鉴意义。     

Felony probation: A re-examination of public risk

The California Rand study focused major attention on the potential threat that felons on probation presented to the public. Their findings of a 65% rearrest rate during a 40-month follow-up of 1672 felons raised considerable concern but left one key question unanswered: are those disturbing results unique to California or are they representative of a nationwide crisis generated by the critical prison overcrowding problem? The authors of the present study replicated the Rand report for the State of Missouri in an attempt to answer those questions. A total of 2083 felons from the most urban population of Missouri were tracked for the same 40-month period utilized by Rand, with very different results. The Missouri rearrest rates were found to be a respectable 22%. The obvious conclusion is that felony probation is an effective alternate to prison in Missouri, and the Rand study may not be representative of felony probation in general.     

重罪案件适用认罪认罚从宽制度研究

随着认罪认罚从宽制度的不断发展,该制度的整体适用率逐步提高.其中,认罪认罚从宽制度在重罪案件领域的适用问题备受关注,这与重罪案件办理的现实需求关系密切.从实践情况来看,在重罪案件办理过程中,认罪认罚从宽制度的适用存在诸多问题,包括地方适用情况差距较大、适用影响因素较复杂、部分重罪案件适用效果较有限等.实际上,在重罪案件适用认罪认罚从宽制度过程中,检察机关发挥重要的审前主导作用,体现在证据情况的把握、控辩协商的程序以及量刑建议的提出等方面.为了更好地促进认罪认罚从宽制度在重罪案件中的有效实施,未来还需要进一步明确具体的适用标准,完善控辩协商机制,发挥庭前会议功能,保障良好社会效果.     

The Timing of Justice in Felony Trial Courts*

Criminal court delay raises serious political and policy concerns. Analysis of the problem, however, is hobbled by the absence of theory and a lack of comparative, multivariate research that includes both micro-level and contextual factors. This article draws on data from nine circuit-level courts to develop an empirical model combining these factors. The results raise new questions about future research designs in this area and about the need to recognize policy trade-offs in the formulation of reforms.     

Regional Differences in the Collateral Consequences of a Felony Conviction

The present study sought to determine if there are statistically significant regional differences in the number of restricted rights for a felony conviction. Significant differences were found, with the East South Central region restricting two to three times more rights than other regions. Nonsignificant rank-order correlations were found between the number of restricted rights and regional crime/prisoner rates per 100,000 population. A significant rank-order correlation was found, however, for the mean number of restricted rights and the percent voting for the 1988 Republican presidential candidate.     

Case Dismissed: Police Discretion and Racial Differences in Dismissals of Felony Charges

Prior research has produced conflicting evidence of racial profilingduring traffic stops. We instead analyze rates of case dismissalagainst felony arrestees by race. Superficial bias based on"unobservables" should be reduced because of the evidentiaryrequirements and nonnegligible costs of filing charges. Nonetheless,using data from over 58,000 US felony cases from 1990 to 1998,our probit analysis finds higher rates of dismissals for blacksfor the subset of crimes that rely on police to make snap judgments.This suggests there may be more aggressive policing of blacksin these situations. Case dismissal rates are also elevatedfor both whites and blacks when blacks are underrepresentedon local police forces.     

重罪轻罪的划分及其意义

根据犯罪行为的社会危害性大小或者应受刑罚轻重的不同,而对犯罪作出重罪、轻罪或违警罪等不同等级的划分,是国外刑事立法的普遍做法。这种分类方式在刑事实体、诉讼程序和刑事政策方面均有着积极的意义。我国刑事立法有必要借鉴这一立法模式。     

Symbol and Substance: Effects of California's Three Strikes Law on Felony Sentencing

California's “three strikes and you're out” law is the most notorious example of the wave of mandatory sentencing policies that many states enacted beginning in the late 1970s. While advocates and critics predicted the law would have profound effects on aggregate punishment trends and individual case outcomes, Feeley and Kamin's analysis of previous sentencing reforms suggested the law's impact would be mainly symbolic because local officials would ignore, subvert, or nullify its major provisions. While aggregate analyses have tended to confirm this argument, so far there has been no systematic test of the law's effect on individual cases. This analysis uses multilevel models applied to case‐level data from 12 urban California counties to test hypotheses about shifts in average punitiveness, the relative influence of legal and extralegal factors on sentencing, and the uncertainty of sentencing outcomes. Results mostly support Feeley and Kamin's symbolic interpretation, but also reveal important substantive impacts: since Three Strikes, sentences have become harsher, particularly in politically conservative counties, and black felons receive longer prison sentences.     

我国重罪案件适用刑事和解面临的挑战及应对

刑事和解在我国重罪案件中的适用具有一定的普遍性.我国新《刑事诉讼法》第277条规定刑事和解仅适用于轻罪案件,这为今后在重罪案件中适用刑事和解带来了挑战.我国刑事和解制度包含的内容在附带民事诉讼调解中均能直接或间接地体现出来,因而新《刑事诉讼法》第101条关于附带民事诉讼调解的规定为刑事和解适用于重罪案件提供了可能.为了规范刑事和解在重罪案件中的适用,建议明确可以适用附带民事诉讼调解的重罪案件范围、在附带民事诉讼调解中确立刑事和解优先原则、明确附带民事诉讼调解的最高赔偿标准和从宽处罚的幅度.     

美国刑法中的重罪谋杀罪规则评析

重罪谋杀罪是英美刑法中比较特殊,并引起很多批评和质疑的罪名。目前,美国大部分州的刑法仍保留有该罪名,但其适用范围和条件受到越来越多的限制,实际上被限于在实施重罪过程中故意或过失造成死亡结果的情形。由于该罪名的设置仍具有一些积极意义且限制了适用范围,尽管存在比较严厉的批评之声,但绝大多数州的刑法仍然保留了重罪谋杀罪规则,短期内没有被废除的迹象。