量刑程序中的证据问题初探

近些年来，随着司法活动中“重定罪、轻量刑”的审判程序弊端的不断显现，学者对大陆法系定罪量刑一体化的模式的反思也随之深入，而构建一个相对独立的量刑程序成为我国审判程序改革的重要趋势。证据问题是量刑程序的一个重要方面。量刑程序中的证据问题主要包括证据的构成，证据所需要证明的事实，举证责任的分配以及证明标准等。     

死刑量刑程序刍议

就目前中国的国情和司法现状而言，应当把死刑案件的改革集中在一审程序的加强和改造上，尤其是加强死刑量刑程序的规范化建设。应在我国死刑程序的审理中设立一个单独的量刑程序。重心在于解决选择合适的死刑量刑程序模式、提高证明标准、确立非法证据排除规则、引入量刑建议制度等方面的认识问题。构建我国死刑量刑程序的具体思路，应从量刑程序合议庭的组成、定罪程序与量刑程序的间隔、量刑程序的自动启动、控辨双方就证据进行质证、以及量刑程序中的特殊调查取证权等方面着眼。     

论我国量刑制度的改革——以美国联邦《量刑指南》为视角

我国有些地方法院进行了量刑规范化的一些尝试。为扭转我国"重定罪,轻量刑"的观念,减少"人情案"、"关系案"的作用空间,使量刑日益规范化、专业化,结合美国《量刑指南》从无到有、从强制性适用到只需参考、咨询的经验,我国应制定全国统一适用的量刑细则,并对量刑方法、量刑程序进行改革。     

Does Gender Modify the Effects of Race–ethnicity on Criminal Sanctioning? Sentences for Male and Female White, Black, and Hispanic Defendants

Using data from large urban courts for the years 1990–1996 and drawing from the “focal concerns” framework on case-process decision making, we examine the main and interactive effects of gender and race–ethnicity on sentence outcomes. The main focus of the present study is whether the effects of race–ethnicity (and gender) on sentence outcomes are similar or different across gender (and racial–ethnic) groups. Consistent with the findings of prior research, we find that female defendants receive more lenient sentences than male defendants and that black and Hispanic defendants receive less favorable treatment than white defendants. However, these main effects are strongly dependent on whether the sample is partitioned by gender or race–ethnicity. We find that race–ethnicity influences male but not female sentences. Conversely, gender strongly influences sentencing across all racial–ethnic groups. These findings are at odds with the traditional view that leniency in court sanctioning typically by-passes “women of color.” Instead, it appears that black and Hispanic female defendants actually benefit more from their “female” status than would be expected all else equal.

THE PROSECUTION AND PUNISHMENT OF INTERNATIONAL TERRORISTS IN FEDERAL COURTS: 1980–1998*

Research Summary: This study reports findings from the American Terrorism Study. The data show that from 1980 to 1998, the U.S. government periodically tried accused domestic and international terrorists through the use of traditional criminal trials. The extent to which federal prosecutors “explicit politicized” these trials (and the success that the politicization had) varied among the types of terrorist groups. Explicit politically was not found to be successful in trials of domestic terrorists but seemed to work for trials involving international terrorists. Over the 20‐year period, however, federal prosecutors began to rely more heavily (and more successfully) on the politicization of the criminal acts by international terrorists. The results also show that international terrorists, like their domestic counterparts, are much less likely to plead guilty. Finally, the study shows that these traditional trials have resulted in international terrorists being punished more severely than domestic terrorists. Unfortunately, the practice of performing these politicized trials within the venue of the federal court system may have been compromised by defense strategies that capitalized on the due process procedures so prominent in the U.S. system of justice. In the wake of the terrorism attacks in September 2001 by foreign nationals, the federal government began to take the next step in its “war against terrorism” by instituting the use of military tribunals. Policy Implications: Although the federal government has been relatively successful in the prosecution of terrorism in America in the past two decades, the movement toward the use of military tribunals has perhaps become inevitable (as the use of the traditional criminal trial for international terrorists manifests weaknesses). In the short term, it is likely that several international terrorism cases stemming from the September 2001 attacks and other subsequent attacks (which may be presumed) will be tried in federal courthouses across the country (even with the advent of military tribunals). Federal prosecutors will need to be trained on the specifics of trying these kinds of cases. In the long term, the use of military tribunals will provide greater ease of prosecution for the federal government. Long‐term consequences such as retaliatory attacks and attacks aimed at the release of political prisoners cannot be ignored by policy makers.     

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF POLITICALLY POPULAR SENTENCING POLICY: THE HOMICIDE PROMOTING EFFECTS OF “THREE STRIKES” IN U.S. CITIES (1980–1999)*

Research Summary: Using panel data from 188 large cities during 1980–1999, we examined the possible homicide promoting effects of “three‐strikes” laws. Results indicated that cities in states with three‐strikes laws experienced short‐term increases in homicide rates of 13% to 14% and long‐term increases of 16% to 24% compared with cities in states without the laws. Policy Implications: Our results emphasize the fact that rarely are the possible unintended negative consequences of policy directives considered and point to the need for policy makers to consider both intended and unintended consequences of policy directives before the directives are codified.     

同种数罪的定罪与处罚原则研究

目前同种数罪的从重处罚原则,与异种数罪的合并处罚原则相比,明显违背了罪刑相当原则,放纵了罪犯,不能有效地打击犯罪和保护社会秩序.解决同种数罪的问题,需要明确其各种类型--特殊同种数罪和普通同种数罪.在此基础上,解决认定同种数罪的复杂问题,主要通过与异种数罪的对比研究,确立统一的并罚原则,作为解决同种数罪理论和实践问题的最佳方案.     

Severe personality disorder,treatment engagement and the Legal Aid,Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012: what you need to know

Empirical research has demonstrated a link between legal coercion and treatment engagement following conviction among those with severe personality disorder. Legal coercive pressures were often applied by the Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection (IPP), until it was replaced by the Extended Determinate Sentence by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. In this paper, it is proposed that use of the new determinate sentence will lessen motivation for treatment engagement. One effect of treatment refusal may be greater reliance by the Secretary of State for Justice on his jurisdiction to transfer prisoners due for release to secure hospital transfers under the Mental Health Act 1983. Not only will this risk posturing undermine the principal aim of the Offender Personality Disorder Implementation Pathway to improve treatment engagement among the target group, it will also have negative implications for medical practitioners working in secure forensic hospitals. To demonstrate what is at stake, the paper briefly recapitulates empirical findings familiar to readers of the journal, before drawing on original unpublished data.     

Effects of psychopathy and violence risk testimony on mock juror perceptions of dangerousness in a capital murder trial

The recent introduction of the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) into the sentencing phase of capital murder trials has heightened concerns about the potentially prejudicial impact of such information on jurors, who might give disproportionate weight to this diagnosis when determining whether a defendant is a “continuing threat to society”. To investigate this issue, 238 undergraduates read a case summary based on US v. Barnette ( ), in which prosecution testimony was presented regarding the presence of a mental disorder (psychopathy, psychosis, or no disorder). Compared to the “no disorder” condition, participants rated psychopathic defendants as more likely to be violent in the future, even though testimony related to level of risk (high or low) was held constant. The difference in perceived dangerousness across the psychopathy and no disorder groups was particularly pronounced when the experts described the defendant as being at low risk. A similar pattern of effects was noted for the psychosis condition, suggesting that the impact of mental disorder testimony on perceptions of dangerousness may not necessarily be specific to the PCL-R.     

No Evidence of Specific Deterrence under Penal Moderation: Imprisonment and Recidivism in Finland

International literature on prison effects on recidivism tends to find little evidence of specific deterrence. If anything, imprisonment seems more likely to increase than decrease rates of offending. The present study adds to this literature by examining imprisonment and recidivism in Finland, a nation characterized by an exceptionally moderate penal culture. It has been suggested that severe sanctions need to be imposed selectively in order for them to be effective. In this research, we estimated the impact of first imprisonment on recidivism in comparison with offenders sentenced to either suspended imprisonment or community service. Using data from government population registries, we controlled for a large number of legal and extra-legal confounding factors, including criminal history and socio-demographic characteristics. We found no evidence of reduced recidivism as a result of imprisonment. Instead, consistent with prior research, we find evidence of increased recidivism in certain offender categories. We conclude with a discussion of policy implications.